10/26/18
On Monday, October 29, an important trial is scheduled to begin at the Federal Courthouse in Eugene. In Juliana v. The United States, young plaintiffs who are concerned about the accelerated rate of greenhouse gas emissions by the USA and other nations is putting their future at risk, due to global warming. The science, including recent updates by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), warn of alarming consequences to our atmosphere, oceans, water balances, and flora and fauna. This alarm is based on sound peer-reviewed science conducted across the world. And the USA, China and others are not doing nearly enough to stem the dangerous rate of emissions caused by human activity.
Our scientists who work for federal agencies are being silenced, neutered, or reassigned to unscientific jobs, while scientific advisory panels are being eliminated, and not just in the EPA (UO graduate Ryan Zinke in Interior is doing his part as well). Scientists come in many types – we are women and men. We are white and we are people of color. We are immigrants and refugees. We are human. Scientists make mistakes probably just as often as any reader of this paper. Scientists are trained to be objective in how they treat results they obtain. They strive to work harder at finding answers, and publish their results through rigorous peer-review in scientific journals. You can read them in libraries.
Nowadays we find our scientific community under attack, whether it is related to climate change or not. And these individuals are not all Republicans, so let’s not tar the entire GOP with that brush. Here in the Willamette Valley we are represented by reasonable men in Washington DC who accept the scientific evidence of climate change, because they believe the scientists they talk to. It does not require a “belief” in science to be there, too. But it helps to have a skeptical approach towards claims that have not undergone such scrutiny, and are advanced by heavily funded groups that receive funding from large political action committees or fossil-fuel companies. Scientists are not in it for the money, as is so often claimed. We are the curious and industrious truth-seekers who strive to understand and make things better.
The present anti-science approach to federal government policy is reprehensible. Your ballot may provide an opportunity to raise your voice against it. We owe it to the future of our children and our grandchildren to pay attention. Let’s all do our part to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and encourage our representatives at local, state and federal levels to increase their diligence in this matter.
Fortunately there are still good scientists working on this issue both inside and outside of the federal government. In Oregon, we have the Oregon Climate Change Research Institute (OCCRI) at Oregon State University (http://www.occri.net). The national climate information portal is also a great resource for this information; you can find them at https://www.climate.gov. Both of these resource sites contain very readable summaries of the scientific evidence for the human footprint on climate change, and its likely impacts going forward. I, as a climate scientist, still have hope, that our governments will take action to reduce our dependence on carbon and to induce individuals to take responsible action as well. We also must do this being responsive to those who are more likely to suffer from environmental injustices, and encourage a restoration of funding of environmental justice and environmental education programs with a basis in sound science.
Sincerely,
Paul Ruscher, PhD
Ruscher is a Fellow of the American Meteorological Society and serves Lane Community College as its Science Dean.
PS - I’ve been inspired by the turnout at the Federal Courthouse this AM supporting @youthvgov. Here’s an op-Ed I submitted to the R-G last Friday. Maybe they'll publish it but it's here in case they don't!
No comments:
Post a Comment