Del. global warming skeptic stands pat

Delaware's state climatologist David R. Legates

Delaware's state climatologist has found himself in the middle of a political squall after taking skeptical stands on global warming and climate change -- in one case directly contradicting the state's own policy.

David R. Legates, a University of Delaware geography professor, co-wrote a "friend of the court" brief that opposed Delaware's position in a multi-state U.S. Supreme Court case.

In the appeal, state regulators argued that carbon dioxide from new cars should be regulated because of evidence the gas was contributing to rising global temperatures, climate shifts and changes in the environment. The Bush administration and industry critics opposed the demand, saying the dire warnings are unproven.

Enter Legates, a Ph.D. climatologist who received the title of state climatologist in 2005 from Daniel Leathers, now the head of the University of Delaware's geography department.

Legates joined a group of scientists late last year in urging the court to reject the state claims, in a brief filed by the conservative Competitive Enterprise Institute.

"It is simply impossible to conclude that the net effect of greenhouse gases endangers human health and welfare," the brief said.

The institute has sued the government in the past to block some fuel economy standards for automobiles.

Two sides of the coin

The appearance of Delaware's climatologist on the other side of the court case left some state Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control officials frustrated.

"He's taken a position that 'The climate is changing, but we don't have any danger signs,' " said Ali Mirzakhalili, air quality management chief for DNREC.

Recently branded "a favorite scientist of the global warming denial machine" by one national environmental group, Legates said he was following scientific evidence in arguing the institute's position in the court case. He has taken similar positions dating back to at least 1998, while a professor at Louisiana State University.

"The science brought in by the one side had given a more extremist view of climate change," Legates said. "What we're trying to say is, the science isn't necessarily that well settled, and in many cases it isn't that extreme. I'm not saying it isn't a problem."

As state climatologist, a position the state doesn't fund, Legates collects and shares climate data with the National Climatic Data Center, the Northeast Regional Climate Center and the National Weather Service office in Mt. Holly, N.J. Similar positions exist in 41 other states and Puerto Rico, generally staffed by state employees or university staffers.

"I don't think the doctor [Legates] speaks for the state's position," said Philip Cherry, a DNREC administrator who recently invited Legates to address agency employees. "I think the governor speaks for the state's position."

Delaware has accepted the view human activities contribute to global warming, and changes are needed to curb risks of sea level rise and climate change. The state adopted a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in 2000.

An updated report on global warming and its consequences by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, due Friday, is expected to include forecasts of rising sea levels and changing weather and climate conditions worldwide.

Legates disputes warnings

Federal scientists have long warned that sea-level increases could be most pronounced along the mid-Atlantic, including the shores of the Chesapeake Bay and Delaware Bay.

Some forecasts have predicted that Delaware could lose 50 percent or more of its tidal wetlands under worst-case scenarios.

But during a presentation sponsored by the conservative Heritage Foundation last year, Legates said, "This has become climate alarmism."

Then in early 2006, the National Policy Research Center, a conservative think tank, published a paper by Legates saying science "does not support claims of drastic increases in global temperatures over the 21st century, nor does it support claims of human influence on weather events and other secondary effects of climate change."

NPRC listed Legates as an adjunct scholar at the time the paper was released, as well as director of the University of Delaware's Climatic Research Center.

In 2003 Legates was called to testify in the U.S. Senate by Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla, a global warming skeptic prone to talk of "debunking" scientific climate change conclusions that are now widely accepted.

During that testimony Legates disputed findings of the international panel, saying researchers failed to prove recent warming trends or that human causes are "the only significant factor."

Wilmington resident Chad Tolman, a retired DuPont Co. research scientist who held positions with the National Academy of Sciences, said Legates' position clashed awkwardly with most Delaware scientists.

"I just don't know how, in the face of all the evidence, [he] maintains [his] position," Tolman said.

Cherry, who is managing Delaware's efforts with other states to cap regional greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, said Legates was free to take a stand that contradicts Delaware.

"But I have to say he's in the very small minority," Cherry said.

Post a Comment   View All Comments

Posted by: sparkydogg- Thu Feb 01, 2007 9:24 pm

The leftists love to talk about diversity. Too bad they hate diversity of opinion when it contradicts their sacred views on politics, religion, science, race relations, border security, you name it. This piece is an obvious attempt to label this brave scientist and marginalize him.

There have been many periods of warming and cooling since man has been on the earth. This is not the warmest it has ever been.

Leftist are thinking from a very limited emotional point of view. We're not just talking about modern records since the advent of the thermometer, but historical records such as the Romans describing wine vineyards in England.

Pity these poor fools who ignore anything that contradicts their dogma. They will call you closed-minded as they shut down all debate through whatever means necessary. They will smear you, jeer you and call you bad names.

Posted by: starving actor- Thu Feb 01, 2007 8:36 pm

Hello. Think about a greenhouse a minute. Ye, it can be warm inside on a sunny but cold day. The plants are sucking in the sun, so at night they can respirate and give off OXYGEN.
But you know, while it SOUNDS PLAUSIBLE that 'greenhouse gas, like carbon dioxide" caused the air inside the greenhouse to warm there is more warming from the sun's rays hitting objects. And the evaporated moisture in the air holds heat the best. And the fact that the inside of the greenhouse is an enclosed system helps too.
OK you can argue earth is an enclosed system. And rattle on incessantly, fully convinced that if you shout longest and fastest we will succumb to your evil crap.
Anyway- the earth radiates heat. It mixes the heat. Variations in heating is what causes air pressure gradients, then that is what drives the wind. Shallow seas inthe tropics are warmed nicely. Deep oceans have VOLCANICS making el nino. And volcanos all over the planet pump out carbon dioxide by the tons daily. EACH.
There are ways that carbon dioxide can be removed from the atmosphere. Make dry-ice. Toss it all up in the arctic, and voila, instant ice age- especially when the plants all die and the water cycle screeches to a halt becuase of it.
God gave us a good planet. The - threats to the planet are those that are direct threats against mankind.
Liberalism, and Islam. kill them, and we are cured.

Posted by: what's right- Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:42 pm

I have learned through this forum that some people think global warming is communist propaganda, some people think evolution never happened, and some people believe man never really landed on the moon (histrionic staging somewhere in the Arizona desert).

Anyone out there still think the earth is flat? Who thinks the earth is the center of the universe? What about spontaneous generation? How about bloodletting to cure shingles...or even cancer?

Maybe the schools are to blame for all this ignorance after all. Personally, I hope it's just a virus or maybe indigestion. I'm losing faith in my fellow man!

Posted by: Testytestacci- Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:11 pm

I live in California where our governor has just said that he's in favor of spending billions of dollars over the next 14 years to lower state emissions of CO2 by 24 million metric tons. I went to Wikipedia and found out that volcanoes--on average--spew 145 million to 255 million short tons into the atmosphere. So what do we do about the volcanoes? And what about a particularly active year?

Posted by: Dana Garrett- Thu Feb 01, 2007 7:07 pm

Muller writes below:

"In fact, one of the reasons our "Progressive Voices" radio show was stolen last year was that I would not put LeGates on to spew his global warming denials. (Thanks Dana Garrett, Marian Pelesky, Ellen Lebowitz....)"

That is a total fabrication and it's easily proven. After Muller was canned from Progressive Voices, we never had LeGates on the program and he was never invited to appear on it. Every co-host participating on the Progressive Voices program is committed to the view that Global Warming is a fact, it's a critical and potentially catastrophic problem, and that human activity is responsible for it. We simply have no interest in having a flat-earther and tobacco-science-like scientist like Legates on the program.

Muller knows perfectly well why he was booted off of Progressive Voices. No one could take his notorious vicious, slanderous and verbally abusive behavior any more...behavior evidenced by his libelous statement mentioned above. While Muller is arguably the smartest environmentalist in Delaware and should be given the benefit of the doubt on those matters, relationally he is an ignoramus.

Post a Comment   View All Comments

Top of page