An Indian Civilizational Perspective

Skeptics of Global Warming and a reply to them!

No matter how strong body of knowledge exists on Global Knowledge.. there are some idiots who still keep throwing out nonsensical information bytes. Here is a skeptic of global warming… maybe he too dipped into the kitty from the Bush cronies?

* The United Nations is anti-American and anti-Capitalist. In short .. I don’t trust them. Not a bit. The UN would eagerly engage in any enterprise that would weaken capitalist economies around the world.

* Because after the fall of the Soviet Union and worldwide Communism many in the anti-capitalist movement moved to the environmental movement to continue pursuing their anti-free enterprise goals. Many of the loudest proponents of man-made global warming today are confirmed anti-capitalists.

* Because the sun is warmer .. and all of these scientists don’t seem to be willing to credit a warmer sun with any of the blame for global warming.

* The polar ice caps on Mars are melting. How did our CO2 emissions get all the way to Mars?

* It was warmer in the 1930s across the globe than it is right now.

* It wasn’t all that long ago that these very same scientists were warning us about "global cooling" and another approaching ice age?

* How much has the earth warmed up in the last 100 years? One degree. Now that’s frightening.
* Because that famous "hockey stick" graph that purports to show a sudden warming of the earth in the last few decades is a fraud. It ignored previous warming periods … left them off the graph altogether.

* The infamous Kyoto accords exempt some of the world’s biggest CO2 polluters, including China and India.

* The Kyoto accords can easily be seen as nothing less than an attempt to hamstring the world’s dominant capitalist economies.

* Because many of these scientists who are sounding the global warming scare depend on grant money for their livelihood, and they know the grant money dries up when they stop preaching the global warming sermon.

* Because global warming "activists" and scientists seek to punish those who have different viewpoints. If you are sure of your science you have no need to shout down or seek to punish those who disagree.

* What happened to the Medieval Warm Period? In 1996 the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a chart showing climatic change over a period of 1000 years. This graph showed a Medieval warming period in which global temperatures were higher than they are today. In 2001 the IPCC issued another 1000 year graph in which the Medieval warming period was missing. Why?

* Why has one scientist promoting the cause of man-made global warming been quoted as saying "we have to get rid of the medieval warming period?"

* Why is the ice cap on the Antarctic getting thicker if the earth is getting warmer?

* In the United State, the one country with the most accurate temperature measuring and reporting records, temperatures have risen by 0.3 degrees centigrade over the past 100 years. The UN estimate is twice that.

* There are about 160,000 glaciers around the world. Most have never been visited or measured by man. The great majority of these glaciers are growing, not melting.

* Side-looking radar interferometry shows that the ise mass in the West Antarctic is growing at a rate of over 26 gigatons a year. This reverses a melting trend that had persisted for the previous 6,000 years.

* Rising sea levels? The sea levels have been rising since the last ice age ended. That was 12,000 years ago. Estimates are that in that time the sea level has risen by over 300 feet. The rise in our sea levels has been going on long before man started creating anything but natural CO2 emissions.

* Like Antarctica, the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass.

* Over the past 3,000 years there have been five different extended periods when the earth was measurably warmer than it is today.

* During the last 20 years — a period of the highest carbon dioxide levels — global temperatures have actually decreased. That’s right … decreased.

* Why did a reporter from National Public Radio refuse to interview David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma studying global warming, after his testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unless Deming would state that global warming was being caused by man?

* Why are global warming proponents insisting that the matter is settled and that no further scientific research is needed? Why are they afraid of additional information?

* On July 24, 1974 Time Magazine published an article entitled "Another Ice Age?" Here’s the first paragraph:

"As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age."

And then someone had the sense and the courage to debunk all these points in a credible manner:

  1. The U.N. is anti-American? What about NASA, NOAA, NIST, etc.?
  2. Communist rhetoric aside, there’s nothing stopping a free-market approach to solving global warming right now.
  3. Who’s not willing to acknowledge what? Solar forcing is mentioned on Page 2 of the IPCC summary. Read more here.
  4. There is no global warming on Mars. Another old myth.
  5. I think this chart clearly shows that the 1930’s were not warmer across the globe.
  6. Oh, and that global cooling thing? Another old myth.
  7. One degree doesn’t sound like much, but it’s an annual global mean. Just because we wouldn’t notice in the short term doesn’t mean it’s not a huge deal. Otherwise, cute attempt at ignoring a problem.
  8. Of course, the National Academy of Sciences found that the so-called "Hockey Stick" graph was indeed accurate science. Too bad for skeptics and people who ignore the new.
  9. The policy of the Kyoto protocol has nothing to do with the cause of global warming.
  10. However, the Kyoto protocols can also be seen as an initial attempt to curb greenhouse gases. One which clearly needs work and the support of the U.S. government.
  11. I’ve already addressed the issue of grant money, which is a non-argument at it’s very best (but so are the rest of these generally).
  12. I don’t wish to "punish" anyone who disagrees with me. I am trying to get them to see reason and understand the science. I just am astounded by some people’s willingness to ignore sound science. Then again, I’m also astounded when people ignore the advice of their physicians… Neither is smart.
  13. The Medieval Warm Period. Yet another popular myth. The short answer: it’s global warming, not just European warming.
  14. One scientists said something that is taken out of context? See above.
  15. Portions of the Antarctic ice sheet are thickening, but yet loosing overall volume due to shrinking area. In short, global warming results in great air moisture which in turn results in more precipitation. Oh, what does it matter, Boortz didn’t care about the science to begin with…
  16. Well, once again, It’s global warming, not U.S. warming. The temperature difference isn’t the same everywhere (particularly wrt latitude).
  17. Interesting that in one sentence we can’t know what’s going on with the majority of the world’s glaciers because we haven’t visited them and in the next Boortz claims to know exactly what is happening with them. The fact is, most glaciers are losing volume and we don’t have to set foot on them to know this. We have satellites that take remarkably accurate measurements.
  18. Again, a portion of the Antarctic ice increased. The author of this study has clearly stated that this cherry-picking of data represents nothing but a misleading use of science.
  19. Yes. Sea levels change naturally as the Earth’s climate changes. However, both are changing at a rapid and previously unrecorded rate. That’s really kind of the concern here.
  20. Like Antarctica, the total volume of ice is receding in Greenland. We recently discovered what was thought to be a peninsula was actually an island connected by ice. It isn’t anymore.
  21. While the margin of error in some studies may support this (most global temperature reconstructions are for only 2,000 years or less), the Earth is clearly warmer today than it has been in 400 years, and likely for more than 2,000 years.
  22. Decreased? Boortz has truly gone off the deep end. Global temperatures have most definately not decreased. I honestly don’t know of anyone who believes otherwise. Clearly, not even the most ardent skeptics make such a claim.
  23. NPR? Much like Kyoto, the willingness of a journalist to interview a scientist has nothing to do with the science. If this is a crucial piece of evidence, why ever listen to a scientist in the first place?
  24. On the contrary, if these scientists are in it for the grant money, they are most certainly not saying it’s settled. It can’t be both. The fact is, most scientists are wanting to pin down the effects so we can back out a solution of what to do about it. This goes hand in hand with making sure the initial assumptions are right. This is science, and it’s clearly something Boortz doesn’t get.
  25. More of that Ice Age stuff? Well, the point is, Time (and Newsweek) aren’t peer-reviewed science journals and if you look at what those said at the time, there was not prediction of global cooling and most climatologists clearly said that there was no reason for alarm of cooling. Of course, as we see now, the mainstream press has a really hard time understanding what scientists are saying. The fact is, the greenhouse effect has been understood since the 1800’s (yes, that’s right) and climate science is a mature field which quite possibly has the most stringent review of any science in the world. The Fourth Assessment Report by the IPCC represents what may very well be the single most peer-reviewed science document in history. To ignore it with the psuedo-logic and poor understanding of science is nothing short of sad.

Tags: ,

Powered by Qumana

Get Drishtikone Updates
in your inbox

Subscribe to Drishtikone updates and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Comments are closed.

Get Drishtikone Updates
in your inbox

Subscribe to Drishtikone updates and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.