Cover Story
by Joy Huff
![[Spacer]](../graphics/spacer.gif){kind=small}
Back to Table of Contents |
Back to Main Index
Previous Cover Stories |
Send mail to The Voice
Oregon State's Climatologist
Discusses Temperature Rise
![[Cover Photo]](photos/cover2.gif)
State climatologist George Taylor drives his car 1,500 miles per year, choosing to commute primarily by bicycle because, he said, he feels conservation of resources is "the right thing to do." --Benjamin Tertin, photo
George Taylor, Oregon's state climatologist since 1991, has recently grabbed national headlines and a reputation as a scientist who opposes the idea that human activity causes global climate change. Gov. Ted Kulongoski wants to strip Mr. Taylor of his title as a result.
Mr. Taylor, who has a master's degree in meteorology, does not deny that humans play some role in environmental shifts, but he maintains that natural variations are the most significant factor in the global climate change debate.
Mr. Taylor spoke with The Voice to dispel misconceptions concerning his current situation and explain the reasoning behind his beliefs.
The Voice: How are you involved in climate research?
George Taylor: I direct the Oregon climate service -- the official depository for weather and climate information.
We have four major tasks: to maintain the weather and climate data for Oregon, to provide it to the people who need it, to research various aspects of weather and climate, [and] to educate the people of Oregon on current and emerging climate issues. I give public talks, compose a report on weather and climate each month and produce a lot of technical publications. I've also written two books on weather and climate, [and] I've been a faculty member at OSU since 1989.
The Voice: The Oregonian said Gov. Kulongoski has asked that your title be changed to "OSU Climatologist" or anything other than "State Climatologist." How would a change of title affect your work?
Taylor: I don't know. One misconception is that I am a self-appointed state climatologist. I was appointed in 1991 by the chairman of the atmospheric sciences department at Oregon State. The custom nationwide has been for the state climatologist to be an academic appointment in the land-grant university in the state.
If people take away my title or ask me to change it, so be it. At this point, I still have my job, and I hope to keep it.
The Voice: Al Gore said that the scientific community has reached a consensus on the causes of global climate change. Is this true?
Taylor: The science is not settled; there's a lot that we just don't know. Science is not about consensus; it's about truth. There may be scientists who feel global warming is a problem, but a very sizable number see it as a natural trend.
We're talking about whether we can control the climate and how. We could restrict carbon dioxide, but it would greatly add to the price of gasoline and electricity, and the overall benefit would be minimal.
The Voice: What has the most significant impact on climate changes?
Taylor: Clearly there is human influence, but it goes well beyond the production of carbon dioxide.
Most scientists believe that climate change is a combination of human effects and natural variations. We tend to differ in the relative degree in each one of those.
In my opinion, in the Northwest over the last hundred years, most of the climate change is due to natural variations.
The Voice: So, are global warming proponents ignoring certain evidence to arrive at their beliefs?
Taylor: I think some develop the temperature histories, ignoring the fact that local land-use change affects many thermometers. When the land cover changes from rural to urban or forest to agriculture, you cause a local change that shows up in temperature measurements.
For example, there's been a weather station at the Portland airport since the late '30s when it was more rural. Now Portland International Airport, more developed with increased activity, has seen unprecedented high temperatures partly because of the land-use change rather than something related to regional or global climate.
The study of climate is still in early stages; we're just beginning to understand the factors that cause change. For example, El Niño and La Niña have only been studied since the 1980s.
The Voice: What is your take on predictions that cite computer model results as evidence that Earth's temperature will continue rising?
Taylor: I don't trust the nature of models because the atmosphere is so complicated. There's so much we don't know, and I don't think we get a valid representation of the future from a computer model.
As a climatologist, I infer things about the future based on what's happened in the past. If we were to review 100 years of data and discover a steady rise in temperatures throughout, I'd say that's a good indication that temperatures will continue rising. On the other hand, if I look back and find that the climate changes in cycles -- which it has -- I'd say there's a good chance that that cycle will continue.
We more accurately predict future climate changes when we draw conclusions from facts than we do when characterizing the atmosphere using mathematics; the climate is far too complicated.
The Voice: What about computer models that include pollution statistics in climate change predictions that claim the earth is warming?
Taylor: Take the case of air pollution. Since the Clean Air Act of 1970, air quality has constantly improved in spite of a growing population, but it's still warmer than it was in the '50s and '60s.
But the '30s and '40s were much warmer. The hottest decade in the past 100 years was the 1930s, and 1934 was the warmest year. So if you start in 1950 and end now, it's warmer on average, but if you compare 1935 to now, it's cooler.
The Voice: Any recommendations for people who are concerned about their impact on global climate change?
Taylor: The debate concerns the human consumption of fossil fuels, which produces carbon dioxide as a by-product. There are lots of good reasons to reduce our use of fossil fuels -- one being the conservation of resources. It's the right thing to do, but we have to do it for the right reasons; the science that goes into these decisions is not always top-notch.
Back to Table of Contents |
Back to Main Index
Previous Cover Stories |
Send mail to The Voice