From a rant against global warming: "Democrats, especially Al "BOAR" want to run our lives and will go to great lengths to put a guilt bag on us..."
It always amuses me when personal attacks become part of a scientific debate; it lets me know that the losing side has become desperate, and has no logical retort.
Up until recently, slow and predictable changes in the Earth's movements determine the amount of sunlight that hits the Earth. During a 100,000-year cycle, the Earth warms and it cools, with the warm period lasting approximately 10,000 years. Historically, temperatures rise first, followed by increased levels of CO2. Pre-industrial levels of CO2 varied, but never crossed 280ppm; today those levels are at 380 ppm and climbing.
The reason CO2 levels in the atmosphere are important, is it that CO2, water vapor, and methane trap heat in the atmosphere. Without this trapped heat, the Earth's average temperature would hover around -18C. The "minuscule" amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is critical, because 99% of the gases (mainly nitrogen and oxygen) absorb little heat.
The general role of CO2 in the atmosphere and the Greenhouse effect itself are well understood. It is based on basic physics, basic science.
There are an overwhelming number of studies (in peer reviewed, scientific journals) that have shown:
1. Surface temperature measurements in the US that have shown an accelerating trend towards higher temperatures
2. Temperature in the troposphere is increasing
3. While the Earth and the lower atmosphere are warming, the stratosphere is cooling. This is what would be predicted by the anthropogenic global warming theory. This cannot be explained by solar variability theory.
4. Ocean surface temperatures are increasing,
5. Ocean temperatures at various depths show warming as far down as 1500 meters.
6. The sea level has been rising
7. There is a net ice loss in Greenland and Antarctica.
8. There is significant sea-ice loss in the Arctic, and the loss is dramatically accelerating.
9. There is glacier loss in Greenland and in Antarctica.
10. There is an increase of the tropopause (the actual atmosphere where “weather” occurs).
11. Species adapted to climates are migrating towards the poles.
12. Hurricanes are becoming more intense.
13. Almost every glacier, worldwide, is declining.
14. Permafrost is thawing, and getting warmer at greater depths.
15. The ocean circulation patterns are changing.
Senator Inhofe gave his passionate 45 speech on the senate floor, “debunking” global warming. Instead, scientific evidence “debunked” every single one of his points. The “Great Global Warming Swindle”, a documentary film by Martin Durkin, argues against the anthropogenic warming theory. The critique of the film is summarized by the bulletin of the Australian Meteorological Society “The [movie] does not represent the current state of knowledge in climate science” Many of the scientists in the film felt they were “completely misrepresented” and “totally misled”.
The words of Martin Reese, President of the Royal Society (the Academy of Sciences for the UK), ring ever so true “Those who promote fringe scientific views but ignore the weight of evidence are playing a dangerous game. They run the risk of diverting attention from what we can do to ensure the world's population has the best possible future.”
I challenge anyone who thinks that Global Warming is a hoax or who thinks the anthropogenic theory is incorrect to cite a peer reviewed scientific journal article that proves their point.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
In the absence of such arguments, time will certainly tell.
It is simply my hope that environment nazis like al Gore do not tax and carbon trade me into poverty before the evidence is really in.
Like most head-in-the-sand global warming advocates are tired of trying to convince me, I have also grown tired of trying to convince you.
Let's just wait 10 years and see. If at the end of that time:
1. Global warming is irreverible, then it is a good thing we didn't waist any money trying to reverse it.
2. Global warming turns out to be a good thing, then it is a good thing we didn't waist any money trying to prevent it.
3. Global warming turns out to be an unprovable fiction, then it is a good thing we didn't waist any money listening to Al Gore.
The great misconception is that dealing with the carbon issue will be our economic downfall. I see it instead as the genesis of the next wave technological advancement. Our country should be the leader in efficient technologies; we should lead the way in solar, wind, nuclear power (I have come around to the last one). It can be an economic boom like the digital revolution.
Global warming is not a new issue. It has been studied for the last three decades, and the “wait ten years” has happened – twice already.
1. Global warming trends will continue even if we scale back our CO2 emissions. The questions in not “can we reverse it” but “how bad will it get”
2. Global warming may be a good thing for a select few, but for most it would be a complete disaster. Your logic is faulty; if we address CO2 now, and get more efficient in how we use energy, we will be better of in 10 years, even if global warming is a myth. We have acted wisely. If we get more efficient in how we use energy and global warming is real, we have acted wisely. If we do nothing and global warming is a myth, we really have not gained anything. If we do nothing, and global warming is real, the we are in deep doodoo.
3. I wish it were as simple as “listening to Al Gore”. It is unfortunate that he is the lightning rod for the criticism from the right. The concern about climate change is not just Al Gore; how about Carl Sagan? Geographer Jared Diamond? Journalist Elizabeth Kolbert? Biologist Tim Flannery? Archaeologist Brian Fagan? The “Evangelical Climate Initiative”? The list goes on and on and on….
Post a Comment