THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, February 19, 1996 TAG: 9602170054
SECTION: DAILY BREAK PAGE: E1 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Profile
SOURCE: BY JAMES SCHULTZ, STAFF WRITER
DATELINE: CHARLOTTESVILLE LENGTH: Long : 151 lines
CAGED IN GLASS, talons extended and teeth bared, the dog-size dinosaur made from plastic snarls noiselessly at passers-by. The animal's past merits a brief mention on a printed plaque that says this species prowled for meat roughly 190 million years ago.
Not mentioned is the theorized death of all dinosaurs from a so-called global winter, brought on by the cataclysm of an asteroid collision with Earth.
Downstairs from the dinosaur exhibit, in the basement of Clark Hall on the University of Virginia campus, state climatologist Patrick J. Michaels considers winter and global catastrophe. Outside on this early February day, seen through small casement windows, are 14 inches of fallen snow, pushing the season-to-date total in Charlottesville to the second highest on record.
``Call me all the names you want,'' Michaels is saying. ``Science is not a process whereby anybody should worry about what somebody thinks of them. On the other hand, we shouldn't go on witch hunts for scientists who disagree with a dubious consensus.''
Witch hunts? Dubious consensus? Since when has language warmed so far beyond the normally cool syntax favored by scientists?
Since the debate over the ``greenhouse effect'' has boiled over into seminars, debates and the occasional television special. Michaels, 46 years old last Thursday, is one of the nation's leading contrarians when it come to matters of global warming.
Today he holds forth on a subject near and dear to him: the hypothesis that the warming of the planet from human activity, from heat-trapping gases emitted from cars, factories and agricultural burning, is somehow driving the world to a dark fate. Leaning intently forward in his chair, he insists calamity isn't coming.
``I have never said that there's no global warming,'' Michaels said. ``That statement doesn't appear in anything I've ever written. The nights and winters have warmed up; the summers have not. What I'm saying is the signal is consistent with a benign greenhouse effect.''
``The consensus has moved towards me, towards lower warming.''
Michaels has little patience with those he calls ``apocalyptics,'' doom-sayers who warn that, on a warmer planet, storms will increase in number and intensity, ocean waters will flood coastal areas, and the rate of plant and animal extinctions will accelerate. It's not as simple nor as threatening as all that, he asserts.
To counter the apocalypse, Michaels has spread his message on the airwaves, and in public lectures and speeches before industry and business groups. He's appeared on the television show ``Nightline,'' testified before Congress and traveled to Europe and Australia.
In the view of avowed libertarian Michaels, the debate over the greenhouse effect has brought unfortunate pressure on policymakers to do something, anything, to counter perceived damage. The worst outcome, he believes, would be to make access to energy more difficult or more expensive; after all, fossil fuels have made it possible for humans to create the highest standard of living in history.
``You better have a very good scientific reason for regulation,'' Michaels said. ``(The greenhouse) school of thought is based upon threat rather than confirmation. I'm data-driven; I've got to see it to believe it.''
At least one of his opponents would rather Michaels remove the crusader's cape.
``Michaels likes to portray himself as the underdog being denounced by the mainstream. That doesn't reflect reality,'' said Daniel Lashof, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council in Washington. Lashof says he and Michaels have debated each other on climate change at least a dozen times over the past several years.
``Michaels has received attention far out of proportion to the significance of his views - in part because the coal and oil industries have spent millions publicizing the views of contrarians. . . . He uses scientific information in a very selective and misleading manner.''
What's misleading, counters Michaels, is the assertions of scientists who draw unwarranted conclusions from data sets. Particularly flawed, Michaels is fond of pointing out, are the very computerized climate models on which greenhouse proponents rely to anticipate future trends.
All working in the field of climate change acknowledge that weather and climate-making interactions are extremely complex. Atmospheric researchers routinely complain that their positions are oversimplified in news reports, that decades of painstaking work can be reduced to a demeaning and distorted 30-second sound bite.
What is sure is that more scientists are using more instruments than ever to measure human impact on the planet's climate. And while there does seem to be a consensus emerging, that humans are altering the global ecosphere in unpredictable ways, the disagreement between Michaels and others appears to be their respective views of the seriousness of the ultimate change.
``Any time you question the popular position, you're at risk because you're not running with the herd,'' said Michaels' colleague, Michael Garstang, a meteorologist and U.Va. professor of environmental science. ``He comes on strong. People tend to find him abrasive. He's a good debater and he'll raise issues immediately. Some people don't like that.''
For a shy, introspective Illinois kid who waited impatiently by the mailbox for government weather statistics, becoming a state climatologist is a dream come true. Michaels says he couldn't imagine doing anything else.
``I'm still that kid getting mail,'' Michaels said. ``I'm as fascinated with it now as I was then. I got what I wanted: a license to putter with the climate data.''
Today, Michaels lives on a 28-acre farm between the cities of Waynesboro and Staunton with his wife, an anesthesiologist, and their two children. The family owns a pair of ``aging horses,'' Michaels says, and he does a little minor farming on the side.
It's in the cultivation of funds for his office that Michaels appears to have enjoyed some success. Despite budget cutbacks at U.Va., Michaels so far has kept open the state climatologist's doors, in part with private monies. About 32 percent of his research dollars comes from industry, primarily coal and oil interests.
Being underwritten by businesses who have a vested interest in keeping regulations to a minimum - the burning of fossil fuels releases huge amounts of heating-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere - doesn't compromise his work, Michaels contends.
``Considering the freedom I've had with private funding, scientists will like it,'' he said. ``I absolutely feel independent.''
``Pat has his opinions,'' said Michael Oppenheimer, a senior scientist at the Environmental Defense Fund in New York City. ``They may be coincidental with the opinions of certain interests in the oil and gas industry. But that doesn't mean Pat is captive of them.''
His main disagreement with Michaels, Oppenheimer says, is Michaels' willingness to gamble that global warming will be relatively minor, that the disruptive effects on people and the ecosphere will be minimal, maybe even beneficial.
``My bottom line on Pat is that he's a clever guy - but I think he's wrong,'' Oppenheimer said. ``He's relatively isolated in the scientific community. Pat believes it won't warm much more than through the lower end of the (predicted temperature) range. Most scientists think that's wrong.''
Michaels, focusing on numbers, argues that his point of view is already being vindicated. The most recent computerized forecasts indicate lower warming rates through the next century and beyond.
``I look at this as the victory for the moderates and a defeat for the apocalyptics,'' he said. ``It's like the Cold War for me: What do you do after you've won? I suspect the second half of my career will be devoted to writing on science and public policy.''
Meantime, Michaels is working on a update of a 1992 book, on the science and politics of climate change. There will be more opponents to debate. And someone is going to have to answer the phone when citizens call with questions on precipitation totals and temperature extremes.
``Climate change happened the day Zog walked out of the cave with fire,'' Michaels said, with a slight smile. ``And the planet survived. And the people prospered.'' ILLUSTRATION: [Color Photo]
HUY NGUYEN
The Virginian-Pilot
Patrick J. Michaels
KEYWORDS: ENVIRONMENT by CNB