The Global Warming Burden of Proof

Originally Posted to 'the Fake Headlines'

It's time for a reverse onus. The global warming deniers have argued for the last several years that unless there is incontrovertible proof that global warming is caused by humans that we cannot take action to reduce CO2 emission because of the damage to the economy.

At the moment there is not incontrovertible proof and there is unlikely to be in the near future. That kind of scientific proof generally takes generations to acquire, for example there is still not incontrovertible proof for the big bang, or evolution. Most of the time we have to go with the preponderance of the evidence or science would make no progress at all. Frequently medicines go on sale at the point where there seems to be a great benefit and there don't seem to be severe side effects.

Right now the preponderance of the evidence suggests that global warming is caused by people. The consequences of global warming (even if we act now) are going to be catastrophic. The consequences of waiting any longer, according to the preponderance of the evidence, to act will be far worse.

Exxon is currently offering $10,000 apiece to scientists who can find fault with the UN Report on Global Warming. Some, doubtless, will find fault with it (real or imagined.) But, I would argue that that is not enough anymore.

The risk of doing nothing at this point is too great. If Exxon and the other companies that would risk global disaster and the health, well being and possibly survival of future generations in exchange for short term economic gain want us to do nothing then the burden must shift to them. They must prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that humans and CO2 do not cause or contribute to global warming. Otherwise we must act on the best information we have and we must act swiftly, sweepingly and decisively.