U.S. Not Doing Enough to Protect Coral Reefs

[Boogie711]

By request - my monthly column:




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"The Day After Tomorrow"
May 2004


Coming soon to a silver screen near you – death, horror and destruction from catastrophic global climate change. But the bigger threat to the environment may just be the hot air exhausted from the talking heads discussing it.

I’m referring to “The Day After Tomorrow.” According to the Internet Movie Database (www.imdb.com), “This movie takes a big-budget, special-effects-filled look at what the world would look like if the greenhouse effect and global warming continued at such levels that they resulted in worldwide catastrophe and disaster, including multiple hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes (I don't quite get the science of that one), tidal waves, floods and the beginning of the next Ice Age.” The movie is due for release May 28.

What will be interesting is no so much the movie itself, which merely appears to be another American-centric big budget disaster movie, but rather, the reaction to the movie from both sides of the environmental spectrum.

NASA has already started to brace for a renewed debate on climate change. It has warned its in-house scientists not to discuss the movie, but has said that experts would be made available to answer questions about the validity of the science.

Noted environmentalist David Suzuki is already bracing himself for the impact from the skeptics. He reports that the movie “is very much a work of fiction. It's a disaster film, and has no more grounding in reality than the director's last big movie, Independence Day. (The movie is) presented in a manner that will surely have all the people who think global warming is a myth in a tizzy. They will no doubt point to this movie as an example of how the whole idea of global warming is based on impossible doomsday scenarios that cannot be taken seriously.”
Is Suzuki predicting that this movie may actually do more harm than good? Is it SO ridiculous, that he’s trying to get out in front of it - distancing himself from a scientific or regulatory backlash? Here’s the problem with Suzuki distancing himself in advance – he didn’t do it soon enough. The Associated Press was reporting crazy allegations about global climate change as far back as October 2002, when they reported a study that Manhattan would be completely underwater within a century unless the Kyoto protocol was implemented.

Climate change alarmist's best friend, former US Vice-President Al Gore, was trumpeting the movie to the media. He’s claiming the movie “presents us with a great opportunity to talk about the scientific realities of climate change."
What’s truly scary is not a big budget disaster movie. After all, no one is really worried about transgenic cloned dinosaurs attacking us, in the aftermath of “Jurassic Park.” What’s scary is that Gore’s thinking may be correct. In an election year, every vote matters, and political regulators run scared at any opportunity. There may very well be regulatory impacts – much less serious discussion – based on a Hollywood work of fiction.

Sadly, the concept isn’t unheard of. Until 1998, both Canada and the United States shared a common standard for the amount of trichloroethylene (TCE) found in potable groundwater – 50 parts per billion. That was until “A Civil Action” came out. In the movie, John Travolta starred as a lawyer seeking justice on behalf of families poisoned by TCE. Shortly after the movie was released, the US government moved the standard for TCE to 5 parts per billion – a level based not on sound science, but on public fears and misunderstanding. I won’t debate safe standards – I’m not a scientist – but the Canadian standard hasn’t changed. In fact, the US government has considered reinstituting the old limits, just because there’s no benefit to such a low standard.

It’s a sign of the age we live in. Complex scientific debates, nuances and understandings are communicated in 15 words or less. “TCE is bad, so we should get rid of it.” So they did. So ask yourself - what happens when it’s your product that’s placed in that mental framework?

This movie is not even junk science – its junk science served with buttered popcorn. But just like corn kernels, complex issues like global climate change can easily pop into fluff.

Go watch the movie, and enjoy your popcorn. But remember that when it comes to complex debate, you either have to be prepared to fight the “popcornization’ of your issues, or face the consequences.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Link of the Month
The graveyard where urban legends go to die is www.snopes.com.

Snopes is the closest thing to an authoritative source on the junk science and urban legends you hear about every day… and a very entertaining resource as well.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Talk To Us!


Bad things can happen to good companies.

When it happens, the smart companies call Checkmate Public Affairs.
We love to hear from our readers. Please call, email, or write us a letter… It’s what keeps us sharp. Not many people get the opportunity to interact with interesting people every day, so we like to remember that and take advantage of it.

Are you curious about us? Checkmate Public Affairs specializes in ‘Defending Good Science.’ We manage issues. And we deliver results, because we love what we do, and are fanatic believers in mind-blowing customer service.

Checkmate is dedicated to assisting corporations with science-based risk & crisis communications and issues management. We are a small firm with a niche practice – which means we aren’t loaded with the overhead and complicated structures of many big agencies.

Do you have any questions? Are you feeling uncomfortable about a situation? Are you on the wrong end of an attack? Call us! We’re friendly, easy to talk to, and are blessed with a natural sense of curiosity. The call is free, and we’d love to take you through some basic issues management with a free, 100% confidential, initial consultation.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff Chatterton, President
Checkmate Public Affairs
Phone (519) 342-0025
Toll-free (877) 284-7952
Fax (519) 342-1221
www.checkmatepublicaffairs.com
"Defending Good Science”

 

[archman]

Nice article Boogie, I especially liked your popcorn comments. The public should always get some realistic grounding when making educated decisions about stuff the media throws out there. The Bad Astronomy website (www.badastronomy.com) makes it almost a mission to break down the faulty science of movies... I encourage folks to visit them and get some laughs. The even have an informative thread on the accuracy of Mel Gibson's "Passion" flick. Apparently nobody was supposed to have spoken latin back then, nor the men have long hair.

That said, I support these overexaggerated and oft implausible movies and TV specials wholeheartedly! Drama sells, and more importantly, it sticks in peoples' minds. I've found it much easier to work with students who are already exposed to topics introduced from mainstream media. Frequently the underlying theories are pretty sound, it's just the details that get overblown. Correcting these details is far simpler and effective than introducing the topic cold turkey (albeit accurate the first time). Being an amateur historian and student of human nature, it's interesting to watch public opinion (and consequent legislative funding) fluctuate in response to movies and television. Properly taken advantage of, fictional media is a powerful educational tool. Certainly makes my job a heap easier!

 

[Kim]

Thanks for posting it Boogie! I must say - you're nothing if not consistent!!
I look at it like this - if you can't get people thinking about something for the right reasons - the wrong ones will do! It's just like selling cars :gr1:.

 

[chrisch]

The UK had a similar bad science scare with MMR vaccine and now kids are getting measles as parents are too scared to let them have the jab.

I look forward to seeing the film.

Kim - I'm a big fan of the gulf stream thing as it affects me profoundly. Trouble is I can't find any sensible estimate of timescale. I believe it could switch in as little as a one year period. That is one year its there next it is not.

From a diving view (we're on Scubaboard right?) this will have a profound effect on sea temperature and sea life. (I guess the wrecks will still be there!). A lot of the nice diving areas, Devon, Cornwall, Western Ireland and West Scotland are gulf stream dependent and this could devastate the UK dive industry. Equally I guess the cold water might bring the cod back, good news for the fish and chip shops..

Do you have more data?
Best
Chris.

 

[Boogie711]

Chris - what you're referring to is commonly referred to as "catastrophic climate change." The science surrounding that is far, far shakier than even the shaky stuff surrounding climate change itself.

The US Pentagon just commissioned a study outlining the effects of catastrophic climate change, but even they admit that it's merely a theory. There's no credible corraborating sources that say something like the Gulf Stream could, over the space of a year, suddenly switch.

That being said, at no point in the last 75 posts have I outright denied climate change - I just don't think Kyoto is the best solution. My 'worry factor' on catastrophic climate change is just under how much I worry about the remaining pieces of the Columbia Space Shuttle falling out of orbit and bouncing off my forehead.

 

[simbrooks]

I had heard, although again it could be bad science again - i never really checked into it, that depending on how catastrophic the climate change is that the gulf stream could completely shut down, not just move southwards - but it might well be theorising, and unfortunately until something major happens that is all we have to go on theories and "interpriting" trends, which typically works for neither (and leaves the door open for further theories for both sides at the same time) side of the arguement.

BTW, just for purely entertainment reasons i will go see the film when it comes out. I hope just like other films, even if not accurate in some senses, it gets people to think about their actions and what could happen - but i doubt it will make any real difference to human activities of consume and waste.

 

[Boogie711]

You know what? I look forward to seeing the movie, but let's put this in perspective. I want to go simply because I like Roland Emmerich's work. I'm a guy, and I thought Independence Day and The Patriot were kick-@ss. (Definitely American-centric, but what isn't these days?)

 

[chrisch]

Hi there.

My understanding - specifically - on the gulf stream thing is that a very small temp rise melts the ice caps and diverts the water flow. This process is a natural cycle that has given us the ice ages. Whether mankind has sped this up or not doesn't really matter IF the change is that swift. The signs are we are loosing the gulf stream as it seems to be heading west... (of course that might signify its a real slow process).

All of which makes it kind of dumb to move to the lovely diving area of Devon if the diving is going to turn to crap. My partner and I have seriously looked at moving there - and yes - just for the diving (its pretty important to us). Given UK house prices this is a decision that could bankrupt us. If the weather gets rough there in the winter all the retirement market would dissapear and house prices will fall.

Selfishly yours!!
Chris.

 

[simbrooks]

All of which makes it kind of dumb to move to the lovely diving area of Devon if the diving is going to turn to crap. My partner and I have seriously looked at moving there - and yes - just for the diving (its pretty important to us). Given UK house prices this is a decision that could bankrupt us. If the weather gets rough there in the winter all the retirement market would dissapear and house prices will fall.

Chris, careful there, talking about my home county. I agree its stupidly expensive to buy a house anywhere in the south of England - the fox guarding the hen house situation of the realtor/estate agents also organising your loans too is just too fishy for me to pry into. So are you moving back to blighty they after Italy? I wasnt a diver whilst i lived in Devon, Cornwall or Southampton - although all 3 are excellent from what i hear and saw of divers.

Even so, who knows what is going on with the gulf stream, but the theory i heard was not so much the flow of water from the ice caps, but just generally the stream getting cooled down and that forcing some kind of off switch for the system. Well as far as i know there arent coral reefs, only rocky ones on those coasts, so maybe this is off topic, but nonetheless interesting to read about and discuss.

 

[chrisch]

Sim, mate you couldn't be more wrong about reefs...

There are some very delicate cold water reefs of the west UK coast. I believe they are too deep for us as Scuba technology stands - 300m or so - but they are there and are pretty rare stuff.

But it is off thread as even the most ardent yank basher couldn't blame the US for what we Europeans are doing to our marine ecosystem (global warming excepted).

I read somewhere (Dun & Bradstreet I think) about a US project to build new reefs using old tyres. The tyres (sorry y'all: tires) were fixed together and sunk as a base for the polyps to grow on. That is the sort of thing I like to see the US doing - and really its historic role in the last 100 years - being at the front of the curve. Sadly (like the UK) I think it is a bit washed up now.

I come back therefore to where I started - I think the Bush administration should be seen to be more green and less big oil. Even if its just for show it would set an example and then maybe we would not be able to shake our heads at the Chinese/Indians whatever for their lack of environmental care. If we wait for the market (whatever you think that is) it will be too late.

Chris