Tag: The Science Show

Categories
Australia

June 21, 1986 – The Science Show does climate (again)

Forty years ago, on this day, June 21st, 

The Science Show [Episode 510] – CSIRO Book Launch; Greenhouse Effect; International Inventor’s Awards; Expo ’86; Creation Science in the US; Positron Tomography; Mental Health Treatment in Belgium

21 Jun 1986 – 21 Jun 1986

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 347ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 432ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.

The broader context for this was that ABC Radio had first mentioned carbon dioxide build up as a potential problem in September 1969 –  the science unit had been aware of all of this stuff. Then in August 1975 the very first episode of the Science Show, the ABC radio programme hosted by Robyn Williams, had a guest Peter Ritchie Calder, the British science journalist and thinker. And what did they talk about? They talked about carbon dioxide build up dating back to a 1961 United Nations conference.

The Science Show had continued to run articles or pieces segments about CO2 build up from then onwards.  

October 25, 1980 – Australian radio’s The Science Show talks about climate change…

The specific context was that in 1985 there had been a scientific meeting in Villach in Austria. And from that various activities had followed, especially in the United States and Australia, with scientists trying to warn politicians that the question of carbon dioxide build-up into the atmosphere from burning of fossil fuels, (primarily, not exclusively)  could no longer be ignored or kicked into the long grass. And so at this time, the Australian Environment Council was about to hear from Brian Tucker, boss of the division of Atmospheric Physics at the CSIRO about CO2 build-up. 

What I think we can learn is this: it’s now 40 years since Australia’s political elites were forced to confront a reality that a few of them see, for example, this National Party senator in 1981 – had been aware of for longer. Forty years. People have been born, had children, and in some cases, those children have had children in that time. Here we are. 

What happened next: in 1987 the Greenhouse Project, a joint effort by the CSIRO Department of Atmospheric Physics and the Commission for the Future was launched. And in 1988 the issue exploded onto the public attention. There were lots of warm words, but not so much action because that would be costly and would not fit with what we were already doing. We are habitual creatures, especially when those habits are defended with political, economic, cultural and military force.

On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays

October 12, 1986 – Ockham’s Razor and the Greenhouse Effect (ABC radio programme)

References

You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

If you want to get involved, let me know.

If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).

Also on this day: 

June 21, 1954 – Manchester Evening News explains climate change

June 21, 1958 – Washington Post reports ‘world turning into a ‘greenhouse’

June 21, 1964 – Goodman, Chaney and Schwerner murdered – 

June 21, 1994 – “National Greenhouse Advisory Panel” established. Hilarity ensues.

June 21, 2007 – ABC unleashes “Carbon Cops” on the world. ACAB – All Climate Activists Barf… 

Categories
Australia

October 25, 1980 – Australian radio’s The Science Show talks about climate change…

Forty-three years ago, on this day, October 25, 1980, episode 234 of the Science Show had the following – Letter re Science Show; Flight from Maths; Hepatitis B Vaccine Success; Carbon Dioxide and Climate; Kakadu National Park; Northern Territory Wildlife.

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 339ppm. As of 2023 it is 419ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that there were more and more people writing about potential climate change. The Australian Academy of Science had just had its first big conference. And so getting a brief item about (I think this one was about starting to make measurements at Cape Grim)something else was not a big surprise. And, as I’ve said before the very first Science Show, in the middle of 1975, had talked climate with Lord Ritchie Calder. 

What I think we can learn from this

Again, that subset of Australian politicians who listen to the Science Show, which is probably a much smaller proportion than the national average, would have known about the problem Long, Long ago.

What happened next

We kept talking about it. Everyone has kept talking about it. In the late 1980s the denial campaigns kicked into gear, once it was clear action was needed, and that oil, coal and gas were in the cross-hairs.

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.

Categories
Australia Netherlands

July 22, 1991 – two #climate idiots on the Science Show

Thirty two years ago, on this day, July 22, 1991, the Australian radio program “The Science Show” (ABC Radio) had two climate denialists on. Oh joy.

(See Robyn Williams letter to The Australian, 1991, Dec 6, p.10).

The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly 356.3ppm. As of 2023 it is 423ppm, but check here for daily measures. 

The context was that the Science Show had from its very beginnings been aware of the dangers of climate change. So Ritchie Caleer, who had been writing about the problem emphatically since the late 60s (and had been aware of it since the early 1950s), was a guest in 1975 on the first episode.

In 1991, the politics of it national of climate, internationally and nationally were getting hot. The negotiations for a climate treaty to be signed in June of 92 were going nowhere thanks to the resolute intransigence and blocking of the United States administration. 

Meanwhile, in Australia, the Ecologically Sustainable Development policy process was reaching its final stages, drafts were being written ahead of release within a couple of months. I don’t know if the Science Show had pro-climate action guests the week before the week after. But on this occasion, they had two idiots. One was Bill Nirenberg, one of the Jasons who you can read about in Merchants of Doubt. He had helped to write the 1983 NAS “changing climate” report, saying, “Oh, it’ll be long term and there’s nothing we can do anyway.” The other guest was Brian O’Brien, one of the more active climate deniers on the Australian scene. He was able to play on the fact that he had been the scientist for NASA, as if this somehow gave him expertise on climate science. O’Brian had written various screeds about climate policy, especially attacking the “Toronto Target”.

What I think we can learn from this is that even the best media has to allow dodgy people on because if you don’t, it is “censorship”. And especially 31 years ago, there was still need to “hear both sides of the argument.” And to be fair, I don’t know how Robyn Williams dealt with that at the time, maybe he did a very good job of sending a public health warning to listeners. 

What happened next

The ecologically sustainable development process was killed off by new Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating and his henchmen within the Australian Federal bureaucracy. The Rio Earth Summit, rubberstamped a piss-weak climate treaty, i.e. the Americans won. And in long term, everybody lost. 

What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.