I was a climate change denier

  • Article by: RICHARD A. MULLER
  • Updated: July 30, 2012 - 9:53 PM

Call me a converted skeptic. I'm now convinced that it's happening and caused by human activity.

  • 304
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
dlhoff16Jul. 30, 1210:06 PM

In another news flash, the earth is not flat.

friessboyJul. 30, 1210:36 PM

Blah blah blah. Just another professor that realizes that in order to keep funding coming to his organization, he must jump on the global warming band wagon.

martiankingJul. 30, 1210:56 PM

Now this poor man will be marginalized and demonized by the right wing news machine for having an open mind and looking at science. How dare he believe vetted scientific facts!

goferfanzJul. 30, 1211:09 PM

These papers are supposed to represent a scientific analysis to tracking earth's climate changes? Paper after paper discusses the large uncertainty in the data collection, even in the last half of the 20th century when reasonable temp stations were finally in use. Laughably, who can knows what temperatures were like in the Americas in 1750 to the accuracy of a single degree. The urban paper readily admits to the controversy in estimating urban temperature effects. OK. Oddly, they also discuss urban heat islands without even discussing the rural heat absorbing effect of turning grasslands into thousands of aquare miles of black farmland. If a surgeon talked to me about my upcoming surgical procedure with the level of uncertainty discussed in these papers, I would quickly decide to wait for better data on surgical outcomes to emerge. That isnt saying climate doesnt always change, and surgeons arent largely reliable, but it's amazing to see people gobble up this type of data as gospel. These papers use words like-->uncertainty, uncertainties, controversy, reanalyze, equations, etc--> way way too much.

justthetruthJul. 30, 1211:11 PM

This is a complex issue that unfortunately gets tangled up in politics and in self-serving grants. The earth has periods of warming and cooling and certainly population growth and varied international regulations on pollutants play a part in current trends. But I suspect this is a "gray" situation, caused by many things, not just humans. We need more study that is totally objective, not tied to politics or sustained funding.

shimbumJul. 30, 1211:23 PM

You guys seem to not recognize the name of the author. He has been one of the biggest, most outspoken, climate change deniers of recent years. Go look at his track record prior to this commentary.

mcjoe1Jul. 30, 1211:26 PM

The Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature was heavily funded by the Koch Brothers to put an end to all the climate scientists spreading climate change as real. Too bad their own scientific results back the facts that the climate is changing and most of it is the result of how we've used our earth's resources. People can argue about CO2 and it's impacts, but you can't argue that we are abusing the resources our planet provides and treating the earth like a short term resource. Our planet is not like a house that you can tear down and rebuild when it falls apart. Very few things in this world are treated in the manner as if they will last forever if taken care of.

archyopterxJul. 30, 1211:47 PM

"careful analysis by the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, which I founded with my daughter Elizabeth" = tainted results.results not impartial.data useless.

sharkysharkJul. 30, 1211:55 PM

Now the tricky part, what can be done about it. Considering that more and more emissions are coming from parts of the World that are completely out of our control, probably nothing. The World will survive just fine.

goferfanzJul. 31, 1212:04 AM

@shim---You know, I have never met a person who doesnt think the climate doesnt change, and it really isnt about the author, so much as WHAT the author writes. This quote is in his very first intro and seems a recurring theme across the papers. So, we didnt have "good" instruments until the last 50 years, and there is still much uncertainty? This author is supposed to bolster the AGW'ers? It's a head scratcher.......----> """During the second half of the twentieth century weather monitoring instruments of good quality were widely deployed, yet the quoted uncertainty on temperature change during this time period is still around 20%. Of the two domains, the uncertainties reported on land averages are often 20-100% larger than ocean uncertainties (Smith and Reynolds 2005, Brohan et al. 2006), though this is somewhat mitigated by the fact that land occupies only 29% of the Earth’s surface."""


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters