OSU climatologist vacates hot seat

George Taylor details his controversial view on weather changes

By Chris Lydgate

Pamplin Media Group, Apr 15, 2008, Updated Oct 30, 2009 (25 Reader comments)

George Taylor recently took a few minutes away from his job directing the Oregon Climate Service to talk about global warming, global cooling and why he thinks climate control’s out of our hands.

COURTESY OF OREGON STATE UNIVERSITY

ADVERTISEMENTS

For the past 16 years, George Taylor has been the most prominent weather forecaster in Oregon – who doesn’t work for a TV station, at least.

As director of the Oregon Climate Service, based at Oregon State University in Corvallis, he’s responsible for monitoring and predicting the state’s weather – which should be a routine job, except that Taylor has drawn headlines recently for his skeptical views on global warming.

Following a debate on climate change at the Oregon Museum of Science and Industry last year at which Taylor expressed his contrarian ideas, Gov. Ted Kulongoski warned him to quit representing himself as the state climatologist (there is some dispute about how official the title is and whether the governor has the power to remove it).

Last month Taylor, who is 60 years old, announced that he will retire in June from the post – whatever its official name – and from the faculty at OSU. Sustainable Life caught up with him in an attempt to clear the fog on global warming in Oregon.

Sustainable Life: Do you believe in global warming?

George Taylor: Sure. Yeah. Yeah. The temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere varies. But I also believe in global cooling. The Earth’s temperature changes on a variety of time scales. Over a period of months, years, decades, centuries or millennia. So to say it’s warmer or cooler depends on the starting and ending points.

SL: OK, is it warmer than it was in 1850?

Taylor: Yes. The planet has warmed in the last 150 years. And in the last 30 years. But not in the last 70 years. 1934 was the warmest year on record. So if you start from 1934, and end in 2007, you’ve got global cooling.

SL: Will it get hotter in the future?

Taylor: It depends on the time scale you’re talking about. In Oregon it will get warmer in the next four months, but it will almost certainly get cooler in the next 5,000 years. We are now enjoying an interglacial period – a period between two ice ages – and these are typically shorter than the cold periods.

We came out of the last ice age about 15,000 years ago, and based on what’s happened in the past, it’s logical to conclude that the warm period will terminate in the next 5,000 years.

SL: What about the next hundred years?

Taylor: To answer that, you have to understand what causes climate change. I believe the climate changes as a result of several factors, some natural, some human.

Human factors include greenhouse gases, particularly carbon dioxide, but also a host of other effects – deforestation, urbanization, emission of aerosols. Carbon dioxide gets all the headlines, but frankly, I think it is overemphasized.

There are also natural factors. Changes in solar radiation, for example – there’s an 11-year cycle, a 20- to 27-year cycle, a 95-year cycle, a 210-year cycle, a 1,500-year cycle, and several more known as Milankovitch cycles, which last tens of thousands of years.

Another big influence is the ocean, especially the tropical Pacific. The tropical Pacific is the biggest source of heat for the atmosphere – it has a dominant effect on weather and climate. Volcanic eruptions generate huge amounts of dust that have a profound effect on global temperatures.

And then there are things whose role we don’t understand, like clouds – they are usually ignored by climate prediction models. They don’t know how to include them, so they ignore them. Same with El Niño and La Niña.

SL: Even if the models aren’t perfect, shouldn’t we cut carbon emissions now, before it’s too late?

Taylor: Look, if we reduce greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, that will tend to lower the temperature, all other things being equal. The question is how much, and are the other things equal? Those are tough questions to answer.

When I look at precipitation, temperature and snowfall in the Northwest, I see stronger correlation with natural factors than with greenhouse gases. So I have concluded that the influence of natural factors on climate is more significant than that of greenhouse gases.

SL: How much more significant?

1 | 2 Next Page >>