Just making it up as they go...
If you are fully invested in "global warming," then there is absolutely nothing that could shake your beliefs. If it is colder than normal, it's global warming. If it is hotter, global warming. More snow that normal, less snow than normal...
Currently the storyline goes like this, the planet is faced with irreparable harm due to global increase in temperatures because the of the greenhouse effect that is associated with higher concentrations of CO2 (and the other "greenhouse gases".) The only way to save the planet is for Americans to drive fewer SUVs.
So there must be really compelling evidence to show that CO2 levels are significantly higher, right? not really...atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) level – reported by the WMO to be 377 parts per million (ppm) in 2004 – is 35 percent higher now than during pre-industrial times when the CO2 level allegedly was around 280 ppm.
While there’s no dispute concerning the current CO2 level, there is plenty of room to dispute the WMO’s 280 ppm-estimate for pre-industrial atmospheric CO2, according to March 2004 testimony before the U.S. Senate by Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, a senior Polish scientist who has spent 40 years studying glaciers in order to reconstruct the history of human impact on the global atmosphere.
Atmospheric CO2 can be measured directly by air sampling or estimated indirectly by, for example, studying air trapped in ice cores drilled from glaciers. Direct measurements of atmospheric CO2 taken by scientists during the 19th century – beginning around 1810 – ranged from about 250 ppm to 550 ppm, with an average value of 335 ppm, according to Dr. Jaworowski.
So there must be some pretty compelling evidence that there is a drastic temperature change recently, right? not really...Mean global temperature appears to have warmed by about one degree Fahrenheit during the 20th Century. About half that warming occurred prior to 1940, while most of the century’s manmade greenhouse gas emissions occurred after 1940. The global cooling that occurred from 1940 to 1970 – which led some worriers to sound alarms during the mid-1970s about a looming ice age – actually occurred simultaneously with increasing manmade greenhouse gas emissions.
There really are only two certainties in the debate over climate change. First, we really don’t have a sufficient understanding of climatic processes to predict with reasonable certainty the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on climate.
But we do know that mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions – like those required in Europe by the Kyoto Protocol and currently advocated in the U.S. by Sens. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Jeff Bingman, D-N.M., – will harm the economy by making energy more expensive and less available.
European nations are already choosing to forego global warming alarmism and compliance with Kyoto in favor of economic survival and growth.
italicized portions are excerpts from Steven Milloy he publishes JunkScience .com and CSRWatch .com. He is a junk science expert, an advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
Currently the storyline goes like this, the planet is faced with irreparable harm due to global increase in temperatures because the of the greenhouse effect that is associated with higher concentrations of CO2 (and the other "greenhouse gases".) The only way to save the planet is for Americans to drive fewer SUVs.
So there must be really compelling evidence to show that CO2 levels are significantly higher, right? not really...atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) level – reported by the WMO to be 377 parts per million (ppm) in 2004 – is 35 percent higher now than during pre-industrial times when the CO2 level allegedly was around 280 ppm.
While there’s no dispute concerning the current CO2 level, there is plenty of room to dispute the WMO’s 280 ppm-estimate for pre-industrial atmospheric CO2, according to March 2004 testimony before the U.S. Senate by Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski, a senior Polish scientist who has spent 40 years studying glaciers in order to reconstruct the history of human impact on the global atmosphere.
Atmospheric CO2 can be measured directly by air sampling or estimated indirectly by, for example, studying air trapped in ice cores drilled from glaciers. Direct measurements of atmospheric CO2 taken by scientists during the 19th century – beginning around 1810 – ranged from about 250 ppm to 550 ppm, with an average value of 335 ppm, according to Dr. Jaworowski.
So there must be some pretty compelling evidence that there is a drastic temperature change recently, right? not really...Mean global temperature appears to have warmed by about one degree Fahrenheit during the 20th Century. About half that warming occurred prior to 1940, while most of the century’s manmade greenhouse gas emissions occurred after 1940. The global cooling that occurred from 1940 to 1970 – which led some worriers to sound alarms during the mid-1970s about a looming ice age – actually occurred simultaneously with increasing manmade greenhouse gas emissions.
There really are only two certainties in the debate over climate change. First, we really don’t have a sufficient understanding of climatic processes to predict with reasonable certainty the impact of greenhouse gas emissions on climate.
But we do know that mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions – like those required in Europe by the Kyoto Protocol and currently advocated in the U.S. by Sens. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., and Jeff Bingman, D-N.M., – will harm the economy by making energy more expensive and less available.
European nations are already choosing to forego global warming alarmism and compliance with Kyoto in favor of economic survival and growth.
italicized portions are excerpts from Steven Milloy he publishes JunkScience .com and CSRWatch .com. He is a junk science expert, an advocate of free enterprise and an adjunct scholar at the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
posted by djobe at 9:17 PM
3 Comments:
So because the one source you agree with says so, it's all junk. The fact is temperatures have risen 1 degree over the last 100 years, and all signs point to an acceleration of warming over the next 100. It may not seem like much, but can have profound effects on the earth. Check out what the whole agency of experts have to say at www.epa.gov. Sure, the ultimate outcome is uncertain and longer term than our lifetime, but does that mean we should disregard it? Pretty irresponsible and careless behaviour coming from you.
The fact is that global mean temperatures CANNOT be measured to within a 1 degree variance. For those of you that are statistically challenged, 1 degree is within the "margin of error."
Again, like I said at the beginning of the post, if you are fully invested, any evidence to the contrary must be dismissed--any evidence that confirms your beliefs, sacrosanct.
You cannot dispute my facts.
Can you dispute that the majority of scientists in the world agree that global warming is real?
Since I'm not a scientist, I tend to believe agencies that are full of them like the EPA and NASA. But you're right, they're probably not basing their opinions on fact.
Post a Comment
<< Home