Strong, Little-Heard Arguments for Action on Global Warming
The sociology of global warming continues to puzzle me. Claims for it are wildly exaggerated. At the same time, however, I hardly ever see mentioned two of the strongest arguments on the pro-action side, to wit:
1. Temperature increases have been concentrated in the interiors of Asia and North America in winter. This is significant, because if increased carbon dioxide is the cause, warming would be strongest where there is the least water vapor– interior land masses with cold dry air. That’s a lot stronger evidence than just the correlation with increased CO2 levels. (Has anyone applied sophisticated time series techniques to that correlation, by the way? Maybe non-economists don’t know those techniques.)
2. There is some possibility of a catastrophic cycle of increased warming, turning the Earth into another Venus. Posner has emphasized this, I hear, in his book. That is much more serious than a few degrees of extra heat, even if less probable.
That these two things get so little play makes me wonder about the judgement of the pro-action people. But it means they may be even more correct than they think, too.