Al Gore & Co.

If one looks up the word climate - climat, in French - in English-language and French-language dictionaries, the treatment is pretty much the same: the characteristic meteorological conditions of a given region, as measured for temperature, precipitation, pressure, averaged over a number of years. My Robert 2007 specifies the following: The set of meteorological and atmospheric conditions to be found in a given delimitation of the globe: aridity (extent of), humidity, precipitation, atmospheric pressure, season, dryness, temperature, wind. Thus one has intertropical, subtropical, temperate, and polar climates, each with appropriate subdivisions. The Robert also goes on to mention that an older usage (1314) allowed one to speak of "changing climates" as one went from one place to another. This in fact makes sense since the root of the word, both Greek and Latin, means 'incline'. A climate is a spot on the planet, an inclination with respect to the sun.

The English definition points to Science as the proper arbiter of such matters, the French looks back to historical and literary usage. In my own mind, climate is something one learns about in geography class, it is part of cultural and social science, and a concept that I am likely to use in bemoaning the need to shovel snow or hope for a deal to the Bahamas.

This morning all over the Newsnet, one finds pictures of a tearful Al Gore and announcements that the a Nobel prize has been awarded for increasing public awareness with respect to - and here I hesitate to use the term - climate change. Le Monde ran an announcement that was close to funereal in its correctness: Mr. Gore is praised for his "engagement" i.e. commitment, the Committee on Climate Change for the "ant-like" work of processing myriad scientific studies into something policy-makers could grapple with: the notion that the temperature in the next century would rise by somewhere between .8 and 4 degrees Centigrade. Well ho, hum!

What about the martian dimension: I am serious. Mars has an atmosphere that is largely composed of Carbon dioxide and it is what allows it to have a reasonably warm climate given its distance from the Sun, unlike Earth which used up its CO2 to create life and ended up with a nitrogen-rich atmosphere. Changing the time-frame and scale on the question gives a quite different perspective. More CO2 in the atmosphere is what things used to be like. And yesterday's Le Monde cited a scientific finding to the effect that the planet is becoming more humid, "wetter", as a result of human activity. This higher retention of water-vapor in the atmosphere might well lead to more severe storms, particularly in tropical areas.

Here's the thing: Science in our time is a mighty enterprise but reporting to us through the lens of climate change might not be the wisest path. There are environmental issues to worry about: biodiversity and our treatment of the living web around us, the dangers of unthinking genetic manipulation for profit, loss of the beauty of natural environments. But there also exciting new developments that are masquerading as solutions, a bit like computer applications. Closed discourse cannot be the solution. Congratulations to all.