Articles by Andrew Dessler

Read about it and/or watch it happen

There are something like 12 bills in the Texas Legislature this session addressing climate change. Most of them are deader than a doornail, but we might see passage this session of a bill to create a Texas climate change task force. This doesn't sound like much, but for Texas it's actually quite an accomplishment.

To get an idea of what testifying there is like, you can take a look at my archived testimony here (Real Audio). My testimony starts at 9:20. Particularly entertaining is the question and answer session starting at 19:20.

Letter to the editor from Arkansas

This is the text of a letter to the editor printed in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette on April 16 of this year:

You may have noticed that March of this year was particularly hot. As a matter of fact, I understand that it was the hottest March since the beginning of the last century. All of the trees were fully leafed out and legions of bugs and snakes were crawling around during a time in Arkansas when, on a normal year, we might see a snowflake or two.

This should come as no surprise to any reasonable person. As you know, Daylight Saving Time started almost a month early this year. You would think that members of Congress would have considered the warming effect that an extra hour of daylight would have on our climate. Or did they?

Perhaps this is another plot by a liberal Congress to make us believe that global warming is a real threat. Perhaps next time there should be serious studies performed before Congress passes laws with such far-reaching effects.

Connie M. Meskimen
Hot Springs

Bush is working with a much stronger consensus

One argument in defense of George W. Bush's lack of action on climate change is some variation of this: "Bill Clinton wasn't any better ... he never sent the Kyoto Protocol to the Senate."

This is true. But it also ignores one important fact.

The science of climate change has improved dramatically since the mid-'90s. In its 1995 report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) summarized our knowledge about climate change by saying ...

... the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on the climate ...

This is weak brew, and given the mixed evidence connecting human activities with warming, it was not at all clear exactly how much action to address climate change was warranted.

Betting the heat

Here's an excerpt from a great article on global warming:

In 2005, Annan offered to take Lindzen, the MIT meteorologist, up on his bet that global temperatures in 20 years will be cooler than they are now. However, no wager was ever settled on because Lindzen wanted odds of 50-to-1 in his favor. This meant that for a $10,000 bet, Annan would have to pay Lindzen the entire sum if temperatures dropped, but receive only $200 if they rose.

"Richard Lindzen's words say that there is about a 50 percent chance of [global] cooling," Annan wrote about the bet. "His wallet thinks it is a 2 percent shot. Which do you believe?"

Talk is indeed cheap.