The National Post published an article about the testimony of Dr. William Happer of Princeton University before the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in which he denies that climate change will cause problems for humanity.
Happer’s credentials seemed decent. Among other things, he’s been Director of Energy Research at the U.S. Department of Energy and does research on the interactions of infrared radiation with carbon dioxide, which is what causes the greenhouse effect. So I dug up and read a copy of the testimony. He avoided many of the warning signs that normally point to pseudo-science, and, as near as my limited knowledge could discern, seemed to show a good grasp of the current research on climate science, even if he didn’t agree with it. I was getting quite intrigued by this point.
I checked out his funding on exxonsecrets.org and there was nothing damning in his profile. A quick search on realclimate.org didn’t turn up much, suggesting that he’s not a regular or high profile denier.
Alas, my hopes that I might have stumbled upon a valid argument against climate change as a serious problem were dashed. First, I found an analysis of Happer’s testimony, with some video that shows the response of the committee chair, Barbara Boxer. Then I did some searching to check the various facts in dispute. Unsurprisingly, they all work out against Happer. Then I found a response to Happer claims on the basis of the science of CO2. Not looking so good there, either. It turns out that Happer’s research is on medical imaging technologies, ie. how infrared scanners detect things in the lungs (ie. where CO2 goes before it leaves our bodies). So he’s not actually involved in climate science or anything particularly closely related. And his position with the DoE was a Bush political appointment, not an expertise based hiring. Happer also achieved limited fame as a denier of the link between CFCs and the ozone hole, so this isn’t his first foray into junk science.
So the long and short of it is that I spent an evening in the hopes that I could stop worrying about the climate but despite initial indications it appears that I can’t learn to love the bomb just yet.
Re: Dr. Will Happer
Since he is not a climatologist nor a biologist, he does not appear to be particularly qualified to speak authoritively about global warming. I do not know whether or not human activity is a significant contributor to the current climate change. However, it is clear that we humans are polluting the atmosphere with the burning of fossil fuels. The deniers don’t speak about pollution control very much. Instead they like to talk about macro cycles of temperature such as the coming ice age.