They call global warming junk science - but I call this junk analysis that's driven by a political agenda and has nothing to do with science and the debate of stated facts.

However, the one fact that is quite clear, is that very few people have actually said the recent Tsunami and Global Warming are related.

The "media" does not say it.

Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace issued a joint press release weeks ago scoffing at the idea.

And every respected climate science center in the world has clearly said there is no relationship between the recent Tsunami and Global Warming.

There are dozens of further examples of people and organizations associated with climate science, the environment, disaster management etc, whom have all clearly stated since Dec 26 - that there is no link between the Tsunami and Global Warming.

The only analogy that has been made by some, was to exemplify the impact of water born disasters on surrounding coastlines. Including the obvious example of an asteroid impact induced Tsunami.

Extreme tidal surges associated with hurricanes, lunar and solar positions and a multitude of other factors can cause coastal shoreline damage, and where sand dunes are breached the impact beyond the immediate shoreline can be significant.

In fact, the American Red Cross will not open emergency shelters in downtown New Orleans should a hurricane warning be issued for the city. Citing the fear that tidal surges and flooding could swamp most of the old city. A recent issue of National Geographic carried a stunning image of a man standing in a New Orleans' street holding a 10 meter flood meter.

There is nothing wrong with comparing the impact of 2 meters of water flowing through a street be it caused by a Tsunami, Storm Surge or Asteroid/Comet Impact. Yes they can flow at different speeds but to be washed from your bed by torrent of water is probably enough to kill you no matter what caused it.

So how about it, Daniel Sarewitz, Roger Pielke, Benny Peiser, and all the others out there making up or disseminating fibs about what other people have said. Maybe its time to cut the bullshit hearsay, and stick to the facts. Verballing others is rotten science and a lousy way to conduct public policy debate.

It's time the global warming skeptics found another straw man to burn in debunking global warming - there are certainly plenty to pick from; and let the world get on with burying 280,000 people who drowned on December 26, 2004, without polluting it with a lie.

Press Release One
Sarewitz Says Global Warming Not To Blame For Tsunami
The shock and awe resulting from the massive tsunami that hit Indian Ocean nations Dec. 26 has left many wondering what could have caused such a disaster - and if there is anything humans can do to control or mitigate future events.

Some quickly suggested that an increase in the frequency of natural disasters such as the tsunami were a harbinger of what we have in store because of the increase of Earth�s greenhouse gases resulting from the burning of fossil fuels. Nothing could be further from the truth, says Daniel Sarewitz, a professor of science and society and director of the Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at ASU.

In an article in The New Republic, �Rising Tide - The Tsunami�s Real Cause," Sarewitz and Roger Pielke Jr., of University of Colorado, Boulder, say that tying the tsunami and other natural disasters to human induced climatic change �is both scientifically and morally unsupportable."

"Reducing emissions is important, but it will not reduce vulnerability to disasters," Sarewitz adds.

Sarewitz notes that while the world has seen a sharp increase in natural disasters, from around 100 per year reported in the early 1960s to 500 - 800 per year by the early 21st century, the cause is not an increase in the frequency or severity of such events, but an increase in human vulnerability caused by where people live - and how they live.

"We know how to prepare for disasters, but the world has not made this a high enough priority," Sarewitz says. �If disaster preparation received the same political attention as global warming, significant progress could be made."

While more people live in coastal regions, especially in poor and developing countries, and while it is true that sea levels are rising, there is no research that suggests that the Kyoto Protocol or even more ambitious emissions reduction proposals would significantly reduce the impacts of disasters like hurricanes and tsunamis.

"It is absurd to suggest that reducing greenhouse gas emissions is an important part of the answer," Sarewitz says. Yet coastal populations will continue to swell, putting more people in a vulnerable position should another tsunami strike. Sarewitz adds that tools to mitigate the effects of these disasters are at hand.

"Most tools needed to reduce disaster vulnerability already exist, such as risk assessment techniques, better building codes and code enforcement, land-use standards, and emergency preparedness plans," both researchers say. �The question is why disaster vulnerability is so low on the list of global development priorities."

For Sarewitz, the answer is clear: Fruitful action on climate change and disaster vulnerability should proceed simultaneously.

"This will not happen until the issues of climate change and disaster vulnerability are clearly separated in the eyes of the media, the public, environmental activists, scientists and policymakers," Sarewitz says.

Press Release Two:
Climate Change and the Indian Ocean earthquake
Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace Press Statement
London - Jan 4, 2005
A number of articles have appeared in recent days wrongly claiming that Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace have linked the devastating Indian Ocean earthquake to climate change. We want to make it clear that we have made no such link.

Friends of the Earth and Greenpeace provided a comment to the Independent before Christmas - and before the earthquake - on the increase in insurance claims resulting from hurricanes, droughts, floods and other events consistent with the likely expected early impacts of climate change.

This was in response to new calculations prepared by the global re-insurance firm Swiss Re that found a dramatic increase in insured losses to natural disasters in 2004.

The quotes duly appeared in the Independent on 27 December, but by this time the article had been rewritten to be part of the coverage of the tsunami. These comments have been used out of context in a number of news articles as though they were comments on the earthquake, which they were not.

In any event, reading the Independent article makes it clear that our comments were about climate change, not the devastating Indian Ocean tsunami.

For the record, we would like to make absolutely clear that we have never claimed that earthquakes can be caused by climate change and have never sought to make any such link.

Neil Verlander
Friends of the Earth Press office
Melanie Hill
Greenpeace Press Office

Simon Mansfield is publisher of SpaceDaily.com and has been a cynical and skeptical journalist since Jan 27, 1991.

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express

Thanks for being here; We need your help. The SpaceDaily news network continues to grow but revenues have never been harder to maintain. With the rise of Ad Blockers, and Facebook - our traditional revenue sources via quality network advertising continues to decline. And unlike so many other news sites, we don't have a paywall - with those annoying usernames and passwords. Our news coverage takes time and effort to publish 365 days a year. If you find our news sites informative and useful then please consider becoming a regular supporter or for now make a one off contribution.
SpaceDaily Contributor $5 Billed Once credit card or paypal		SpaceDaily Monthly Supporter $5 Billed Monthly paypal only