A Reasoned Approach to Global Warming

As someone who was trained in school to appreciate the scientific method, I naturally question issues that are promoted with extreme passion in the media and presented in such a way that you are expected to just accept the premise without question. The conclusion that human-produced CO2 is the overwhelming cause of global warming clearly falls in this category for me.

In the first place, a significant number of noted scientists and climatologists believe that anthropogenic CO2 is at most a minor part of the entire climate picture. Some argue that they are actually in the majority (see the link at the end of this post), proving that there is no consensus whatsoever on this important fact. This however, does not stop environmentalists from using any means to get our attention, including resorting to gross exaggeration or blatant lies.

Secondly, there are dozens and dozens of mathematical models one can choose from to predict the effects of global warming over the next century. The problem with all of them is that you have to assume a whole host of values for most of the factors that make up the incredibly complex global weather system. By manipulating these variables in the models, you can literally generate any scenario that supports your position.

I often listen to NPR in the afternoon and a couple days ago they interviewed scientists on how much the sea level is expected to rise over the next 100 years. The estimates range from 6 inches to 10 feet and the responsible scientists openly admit that they really have no idea how fast glaciers will melt over that period of time, nor are they certain what the temperatures will be in those regions over such a long period. But again, there are some who, simply to get attention, will loudly and with resounding certainty claim it is going to be 10 feet.

Unfortunately, our news media thrives on bad news and absolutely loves to hear these kinds of wild irresponsible predictions. All they have to do is preface their news bite with “scientists claim” or “a new study shows that...” bla bla bla and we tend to believe it.

The unimaginable complexity of global weather is exactly why scientists cannot predict a hurricane more than about 2 weeks out and yet no one seems to question the pundits that predict the average temperature of the entire planet 5,200 weeks into the future! Unfortunately, in the current social climate of green this and green that, scientists who point out the folly in these predictions are effectively silenced by denying publication or having their funding cut back.
It’s not only the scientists who are being silenced. Politicians are even more inclined to take the safe position. Those few who are brave enough to take a stand for reason are getting rarer and rarer. I ran across one speech that is to me a breath of fresh air coming from an elected official. Tom McClintock, State Senator in California, early this year spoke about the teaching of Global Warming in our schools. Note the comments about the peer reviews of CO2 effects and the review of Al Gore’s presentation by the British.

Tom’s Speech on Global Warming Curriculum

Ask yourself this. What if we totally screw up our economy trying to “stop global warming” only to discover in 5 or 10 years that human produced CO2 really has very little effect on the outcome? How many people will lose their jobs because businesses cannot continue to make a profit under the new “green laws?” How much will the cars of the future cost that meet all the proposed environmental laws?

Important Note: The number of adherents to a position has no relation to its truth. Thousands of years of science versus religion has proven this over and over. We need to encourage debate on this issue and not allow the green movement to turn into a belief system that ignores science.