Chris Mooney | Debating Michael Shermer (and Bjorn Lomborg) on Climate Risks
My next strategy, however, was to try to explain that global warming isn’t like all the other issues where one hears the precautionary principle cited—this is the issue that’s really different. This is the one that changes the whole planet. This is the one that you really don’t mess around with. But Shermer still wasn’t convinced: “Let’s just wait and see. I’m more of the wait and see kind of camp. I’m just not worried about it.”
Effectively, policy wise, we are in a wait and see attitude anyway. But having been through this exercise, I now get what it is that I think one has to do to convince a Michael Shermer that global warming is a big, big problem, and not one you wait around on. And I hope, in the spirit of rational inquiry and reasoned debate, he won’t mind if I take the argument a little further now.
I really think the core way of convincing someone like Shermer, who is very scientifically minded, has to be based on physics. So here goes.