Consensus Crumbled?
The “consensus” on global warming has crumbled? It sure looks that way.
One hundred scientists, including many earth scientists and climatologists, have sent a letter to the UN Secretary General warning that the UN’s attempts to stop climate change will be futile, will increase human suffering, and will be a distraction from adaptation.
“Contrary to the impression left by the IPCC Summary reports: – Recent observations of phenomena such as glacial retreats, sea-level rise and the migration of temperature-sensitive species are not evidence for abnormal climate change, for none of these changes has been shown to lie outside the bounds of known natural variability.”
But we already knew that. 🙂
Crumbling Consensus Reveals . . . Conspiracy?
Following last March’s British TV programme “The Great Global Warming Swindle” we now have access via YouTube to two more video productions that present the “other” side of the Global Warming Story — the side we seldom see:
From CNN Headline News:
Exposed: The Climate of Fear – Part I of VI
Exposed: The Climate of Fear – Part II of VI
Exposed: The Climate of Fear – Part III of VI
Exposed: The Climate of Fear – Part V of VI
From the Friends of Science (in Canada):
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled: Part 1 of 5
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled: Part 2 of 5
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled: Part 3 of 5
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled: Part 4 of 5
Climate Catastrophe Cancelled: Part 5 of 5
After watching these it is clear that the “consensus” of scientists that global warming is man-created is not really a consensus at all, but wishful thinking by controlling politicians.
“Real” scientists certainly would NOT declare that the “debate is over,” because their endeavor is to uncover the “truth,” whatever it may be. Theories should be constantly tested against known facts — ALL the known facts and not just the ones that tend to support one’s pet theory.
If a fact does not seem to fit, then there is something that may not be understood and more research is required. That is how science is supposed to work. But when it comes to global warming, it has not.
Inconvenient truths such as the facts that CO2 increases LAG behind temperature changes in ice core data, that a Little Ice Age came and went without human intervention, that glaciers were receding before mass industrialization, that farming was once possible in Greenland but not now, and other facts that do not neatly fit the theory are simply ignored rather than reconciled.
People who are skeptical of the global warming theory are called names such as “deniers” or “idiots,” and their motivations are questioned. These are attempts to marginalize the skeptics — to get them to be ignored — and to distract from the facts that they have to present.
The frightening thing is that the global warming theory is presented as fact in the mass media and in schools. “An Inconvenient Truth” routinely plays in the nation’s classrooms
and on college campuses without the other side being presented — much less than a debate. In fact, when was the last time you heard a true debate about global warming? I can’t think of ever hearing of one — at least not in the last 10 years. This was not the case a generation ago when “continental drift” was the earth shaking new theory. Facts on both sides of the issue were presented, debate was encouraged, and there was never any name-calling. Of course, continental drift was not the kind of theory that could be used to control the entire world’s economy.
With all the rhetoric, with all the attempts to marginalize skeptics and stifle debate, with the inculcation going on in schools, one has to wonder: WHY?
This is Just Silly . . .
Looks like Utica is buying into the Kyoto Protocol! I won’t bore you with a dissertation on why I think this is nonsense . . . just direct you to previous posts here and here and here.
Indoctrination . . .
Herkimer students plan to ‘Change a Light, Change the World’ according to today’s OD. Students are joining a national movement to encourage others to switch from incandescent to ‘greener’ forms of lighting to prevent global warming, and will be holding “multiple fund raisers” to buy every kid in school an energy efficient light bulb.
So, how much time will be burned up with the “multiple fund raisers” and the numerous assemblies and awards-giving ceremonies that surely will follow? How much basic science could they have been taught during the time spent on this nonsense?
As part of their ecology unit, the students watched the Oscar-winning film “An Inconvenient Truth” starring former Vice President Al Gore.
Well that’s another hour and a half out of class . . . Lazy teacher! But, you can be sure that “The Great Global Warming Swindle” won’t see the light of day.
This isn’t teaching the kids science, it’s indoctrination … and you are paying for it.
The Great Global Warming Swindle . . .Is the Consensus Crumbling?
“The Great Global Warming Swindle” is a British Channel 4 production available on Google Video. It is well worth your staring at your computer screen and listening for its full 76 minute length (broadband connection recommended). In great detail it attempts to debunk what you’ve been hearing in the main-stream media — and from the UN’s IPCC — about alleged human-induced global warming. It presents some of the scientists who are listed as contributors to the IPCC’s publications as now being against what the IPCC has been saying. It even has a little surprise (half way through the program) about who was one of the people who got the GW-theory ball rolling and why. Very, very interesting, its delivery via Google demonstrates the potential of the internet as an alternative to television. The Washington Times had an article about the program this past week.
It is refreshing to see that there IS ANOTHER SIDE to the debate — rather than hear “the debate is over.”
In the next few days the GW proponents will come out on the attack — and they should if anything was misstated or misrepresented in the program. But the debate should be about facts and logic — not about Who is doing the talking.
The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, Kudzu, and Upstate
The Global Warming story out of California that we blogged about last week got us wondering about what has been going on with the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI or “ReGGIe”), a plan by northeastern states to reduce carbon dioxide emissions to help combat global warming.
The answer is that plenty has been going on. A Memorandum of Understanding between the signatory states was released 12/20/05 and amended 8/8/06. A 163 page Model Rule was released 8/15/06. New York State DEC just announced that New York will propose a draft regulation this fall. So, it appears that the Northeast is well on its way to bringing itself into allignment with those countries who signed on to the Kyoto Protocol even though the US as a whole has not.
What does RGGI have to do with Kudzu? If you remember Kudzu, planting of the vine was encouraged to control erosion. It did that very well … In fact, it did that too well. The vine grew like crazy and became a problem itself, choking out beneficial vegetation and, basically, coverning everything, including entire buildings.
Kudzu illustrates the “Law of Unintended Consequences” (or LUC): An action intended to solve one problem creates a host of unforseen effects. Bad LUC happens when someone concentrates so hard on the solution of a problem that potential negative effects of a different nature go totally unnoticed. We fear that will be the case with RGGI.
First of all, Faultlines is skeptical that RGGI, even if combined with a fully implemented Kyoto Protocol, has any potential to significantly alleviate global warming. While anthropogenic global warming appears to be taken as “gospel” by many scientists and politicians, there are a number of professionals who feel that the theories are not sound enough upon which to base public policy.
Assuming for the sake of argument that RGGI will contribute to solving the global warming “problem,” what other effects will RGGI create? The fact is, we don’t know because it has not been studied. The National Environmental Policy Act and the New York State Environmental Quality Review Act were intended to avoid unintended consequences by requiring a thorough study of impacts before actions (including policy making in NY) are taken. We’ve searched all over and have yet to find an environmental impact statement for RGGI. So we don’t know what the unintended consequences of RGGI might be. We suspect that the RGGI carbon cap-and-trade system will hasten the abandonnment of fossil-fuel fired generating plants Downstate, increasing the need to “import” “clean” energy from or through other areas SUCH AS UPSTATE.
Will Upstaters really care that the world’s temperature is .0001 degree cooler when their landscape gets covered with windmills and powerlines to feed the Downstate market? We don’t think so.
RGGI was the brainchild of Gov. Patacki, someone who is interested in higher office and might want to appear “green” for a national audience. We don’t think RGGI has been adequately thought through . . . Neither does Massachusetts nor Rhode Island which opted out of the agreement.
Before any further action is taken to implement RGGI, an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be developed that examines, among other things, how Upstate NY will be impacted.
Global Warming Grandstanding . . .
Yesterday California’s Attorney General, Bill Lockyer, announced that the state has filed suit against 6 US and Japanese car makers for contributing to global warming.
“Vehicle emissions are the single most rapidly growing source of the carbon emissions contributing to global warming, yet the federal government and automakers have refused to act.
“It is time to hold these companies responsible for their contribution to this crisis,” he said.”
The questionable science (and questionable law) behind this aside, isn’t California employing a double standard? What state is more emblematic of America’s love affair with the internal combustion engine than California? What state other than California is synonymous with the word “freeway?” Indeed, would California have grown to its present population were it not for the automobile?
California could have opted for a vast European style of public transportation so people would not have to rely upon automobiles, but, as a matter of state public policy, it opted for a vast highway network instead. [As a side note York Staters had an interesting piece over the summer comparing public transportation in Syracuse with Bilbao.] California has an ability to control where urban development takes place and the density of that development. It could have adopted regulations requiring a more European pattern of land use, but it instead opted for sprawl, either intentionally or laissez-faire, which pretty much requires people to have their own vehicles.
Given all the opportunities California has to directly and indirectly control the use of automobiles, given all the policy choices California has made to encourage and practically mandate the use of automobiles, California is far more responsible for its global warming predicament than the automakers it is suing.
California is deflecting from its own culpability for global warming.*
*[assuming, of course, that human contribution is real and significant.]
More Global Warming Hot Air . . .
You probably read this past week this or a similar article about Global Warming, proclaiming that the Earth is the Hottest It’s Been in 2,000 Years.
This is nothing more than an attempt to repackage/rehab the “hockey stick” graph that has been discredited. The article reports nothing new. They say that if you repeat a lie often enough people begin to believe it . . . which is what seems to be going on here.
We’ve hardly had “stable temperatures for 2000 years” as claimed by the article. Fault Lines doesn’t think they have resumed growing wine grapes in England as in Roman time, but if they have, clearly for a long time they were unable to. Fault Lines is also pretty sure farming has yet to be resumed on Greenland, as was the case around 1000, but then again, the human colony there was driven out by cold after a warm period. The hockey stick graph did not show these warm periods followed by cold ones.
Check out http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/cause.htm for some commentary. Also go to the Junk Science main page and scroll down to the commentary about the recent news release.
Fault Lines still has its doubts.
Global Warming, Ignorance, Economic Destruction and the New Dark Age
According to yesterday’s Utica OD our area is seeing signs of global warming. Yet the fact that only 3 months ago people in Russia were dying from record breaking cold that spread into Europe and caused the Prague Zoo to move its penguins indoors might suggest otherwise.
Per the OD: “Global warming is largely caused by the emission of so-called greenhouse gasses from cars and factories, said U.S. Rep. Sherwood Boehlert, R-New Hartford, who chairs the House Science Committee. Those gases eat away at the atmosphere’s protection against the sun”.
“Greenhouse gasses… eat away at the atmosphere’s protection …” Huh? Did we hear that right? Or was the reporter just paraphrasing? Hopefully the Chair of the House Science Committee did not really say that. Greenhouse gasses don’t “eat away” at anything; much less eat away at “protection.” This statement evidences ignorance of how the greenhouse effect works, explained here in an animation (ignore the last two frames, which are propaganda).
While the greenhouse theory may be sound, the conclusion that gasses from cars and factories are the major cause of warming (called manmade or “anthropogenic” warming) is far from proven, although a consensus is claimed. CO2, the product of burning fossil fuels, is the culprit most cited along with the fact that a sharp rise in atmospheric CO2 concentration has been documented since the mid-1800s, along with a rise in average world temperature since that time. See Summary for Policymakers, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Although melting glaciers and rising sea levels are cited with alarm by the media as evidence of Global Warming, they are nothing new and, therefore, are not evidence that mankind has anything to do with Global Warming. Any geologist will tell you that Upstate New York was once under a mile-thick ice sheet as recently as 18000 years ago, the ice sheet came and melted four times, sea level was once 300 feet lower than now, and there was once a land-bridge connecting Siberia with Alaska. Obviously something caused the ice sheet to melt 4 times and the seas to rise — but it could not have been man. These geologic facts seem to be ignored in most discussions of global warming. Against this paleo-climactic background, the current warming of about 0.6 degrees C over the last century and predicted consequences of more seem … ordinary!
Curiously ignored by IPCC seems to be the role of the most prevalent greenhouse gas, H2O in the form of Water Vapor, the effect of which probably overwhelms any effect of CO2.
Mr. St. John from Rome in a letter to the Editor of the Sentinel raises the sun’s role in warming, pointing to evidence of a warmer-than-now climate in ages past, specifically the Middle Ages Viking colony in Greenland that was wiped out by the “Little Ice Age” which followed. To this Fault Lines would add that Ancient Romans were able to grow wine grapes in present day England. These ancient warm periods, long documented in history, seem to have been conveniently ignored. Shouldn’t the sun’s role and the Medieval and Roman era warm periods and the retreats of the great ice-sheets be accounted for before mankind gets blamed? Indeed, the whole idea of overwhelming climate change appears to have been oversold.
Of course, Mr. St. John’s and Fault Lines’ opinions can be dismissed as being non-expert. But we apparently have learned enough along the way to know that we have questions that have yet to receive adequate, understandable answers. Given that Governor Pataki has signed New York on to the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative based on a dubious theory, we along with all New Yorkers, face the potential of double-digit increases in our already too high utility rates. Are we not entitled to have our concerns accounted for before the last vestige of the Upstate economy is destroyed?
Unfortunately, people like Mr. St. John are too few in numbers to attract any serious attention. In a “dumb-downed” age where education leaders push students’ doing things rather than knowing things and grade on subjective “performance” standards, We the People have been increasingly conditioned to simply accept without question, and to do, whatever we are told by so-called “experts” based on “black box” modeling that we do not understand.
The whole Global Warming debacle seems emblematic of a much larger, world-wide, societal problem. Indeed, we seem to be entering a new Dark Age where knowledge is reserved for an elite and anyone who knows enough to question is marginalized.
Fault Lines (2) 