The scientists are trying to design ever more high tech experiments, using satellite radars, lasers, robot submarines, or even deep drilling through perhaps 3 kilometers of ice in order to “fill in the gaps” in understanding the risks. “If you’re going to have even a few metres it will change the geography of the planet,” Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said of the more extreme scenarios of fast ocean rise.

I’m just wondering if it wouldn’t be more beneficial to design “ever more high tech experiments” that would actually do something to reduce global warming? At this point, we know that we have a limited amount of time to solve critical environmental issues like global warming. It just seems to me that getting into the small minutia and filling in “the gaps” in understanding the risks is a lot like spending a whole bunch of time and money on a really cool, high tech barn door after the horse has escaped.

Technorati Tags: global warming