Articles by Andrew Dessler
Andrew Dessler is an associate professor in the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at Texas A&M University; his research focuses on the physics of climate change, climate feedbacks in particular.
All Articles
-
How climate skeptics like Fred Singer operate
Several posts ago, I reproduced a few emails to and from well-known climate skeptic Fred Singer.
Since then, I've had a few other exchanges emailed to me. They give great insight into how skeptics work the system to promote their view.
Here's the best one:
-
Unmanned space missions will free up more cash for scientific research
A few days ago, I blogged on NASA's insane and delusional plans to build a manned base on the Moon. My point was not that this is intrinsically a bad idea, but rather that we will never spend the money required to do this ... so money spent now is basically wasted.
-
Moon base project sucks up potential climate research dollars
In the annals of self-delusion, NASA's Moon-Mars mission ranks right at the top. Today's NY Times, for example, carries details about NASA's plans for a moon base to be built sometime around 2020.
Let me be clear. There is a 0 percent chance that this Moon base or anything like it will ever be built, for the following reason: the moon missions in the '60s and early '70s cost something like $100 billion in today's dollars. There is no way that setting up a semipermanent lunar base will be anything other than many times more expensive. That would put the total cost at one to a few trillion dollars.
NASA, however, is spending a few billion dollars each year on this -- something like 1 percent of the money they would need to spend each year to actually accomplish this task, well short of the $100 billion or so actually required. Given this reality, there is no way we will ever actually do this.
-
More on climate skepticism
I often get weird but enjoyable e-mails forwarded to me. This week, it's an exchange between well-known climate skeptic Fred Singer and a group at MIT setting up a climate change seminar. It seems that some members opposed the idea of inviting Fred, which Fred found offensive:
It has come to my attention that Mr. XXXX has addressed a long letter to members of the committee organizing the MIT Seminar series "The Great Climate Change Debate." Apparently, he considers any debate superfluous and strongly objects to my participation.
Mr. XXXX appeals to 'authority' and 'consensus'; I prefer to examine the actual evidence. I believe that's how science works -- or is supposed to work.