Let The “Global Cooling” Begin!
Posted on March 4, 2008
Filed Under Muse, News | 6 Comments
We’re All Going To Fry?
Lord Nazh has an excellent article regarding the Anthropomorphic Global Warming (to those of us who speak plainly that definition means that Humans are at fault) that Al Gore and others are trying to foist on us. Nazh refers to this ever present assault on reason (pun intended – thanks Al) as “Climate Porn”.
Nazh references an article which points to a 12 month long drop in temperatures which has pretty much wiped out the 1 degree Celsius rise in temperatures that the “Climate pornists” have bludgeoned us with for the past 2 decades. And they’ve done this by falsely looking at Carbon Dioxide (CO2) as the culprit.
My Take?
I think both Nazh’s post and the article he links to are spot on. The “Climate Pornists” are hanging their hats on CO2 as the “bad guy” when they shouldn’t be.
Why CO2 And Not The Other “Greenhouse Gases”?
CO2 by itself is a weak “greenhouse gas”. What this means is that CO2 has a very small ability to trap heat when compared to Methane (for example). Methane is 62 times stronger than CO2 in its ability to trap heat in our atmosphere. So why are “Climate Pornists” pointing at CO2? Because there are over 200 times more CO2 molecules in the atmosphere than Methane. Supposedly this makes up for it. But they ignore the fact that Methane is increasing at a faster rate in our atmosphere than CO2. Yet I haven’t seen a Kyoto-like summit on Methane, have you? Plus, add to that the fact that natural causes are responsible for over 95% of all of the CO2 released into the atmosphere and their stubborn insistence that all things CO2 related are evil is mind boggling.
Ask any of the “Climate Pornists” and they’ll most likely tell you that they’d like to go to a Hydrogen Economy to avoid burning fossil fuels. It sounds nice and all, but what they don’t say is that the primary byproduct of a Hydrogen Economy is Water Vapor. Additionally, water vapor is a more significant “Greenhouse Gas” than CO2 and has the capability to increase as the Earth warms up.
So again… I ask. Why the laser-like focus on CO2?
Climate Models (Garbage In, Garbage Out)
We’ve all heard the term “Garbage In, Garbage Out”. This should be the unofficial motto of the Climate Models that the “Climate pornists” use. What is wrong with the models you might ask? Good question.
The Earth is never in balance. There is never a “perfect temperature” that the Earth is supposed to stay at. Let me review why I say this;
- Roughly 3,000 to 5,000 years ago the Earth was anywhere from 2 to 4 degrees warmer than today.
- Between 1100 to 1300 AD the Earth was 1-2 degrees warmer than today.
Has anyone seen any Ancient or Medieval SUV’s ??
What happened during both of these warm periods?
Civilization thrived!
The first period was around the time of the Agricultural Revolution. The second period was a time of discovery (inventions, new lands, etc.. but with the small downside of the Crusades).
Looking at both periods we see that food production actually increased and with it the world’s population.
What the researchers who create the models do is start with a series of assumptions (about cloud formation, warming trends, CO2 accumulation, etc…) and plug it in. These assumptions, however well meaning, are going to get someone killed.
I say “killed” because the solution that politicans come up with is to reduce the amount of fossil fuels we consume. What this will do is drive up the price of everything. That may be well and good for someone like Al Gore who is so rich he can afford higher prices. But for someone in Burma who relies for their care on a hospital (that is powered by a single gasoline generator), they can’t afford it.
Heck, even the French are affected by this. France, a supposedly caring and “Green” country, apparently cares more for an elusive less-than-1-degree-of-cooling-in-the-next-100-years than they do about providing Air Conditioning for the elderly. The result? 14,000 people died in the massive heat wave that swept through France in 2003.
Trust me. If we stop using air conditioners because we are afraid of the Global Warming Bogeyman, that death toll rises exponentially.
What Does Garbage In, Garbage Out Mean?
If you’re still in the dark about what I mean concerning researchers;
- starting with incorrect assumptions (Garbage In) that leads to
- a conclusion based upon those incorrect assumptions (Garbage Out)
Then you need to rent the movie Jurassic Park. I’m sure most people who have seen it are aware of the movie’s premise (it was 15 years ago so I don’t think I’m giving out any spoilers). In the movie, the researchers who are monitoring the dinosaurs, assume that since all of the dinosaurs are female that they cannot possibly reproduce. The only way any new dinosaurs were added was in a controlled environment in their labs where the dinosaurs were hatched and added to the herd.
So what do they do?
They program their counters to stop counting at a specific number which coincides with the number of controlled hatchings of baby dinosaurs. Now, had their assumption been accurate (i.e.- no uncontrolled additions to the herd) the software would’ve worked fine and their daily counts of the dinosaur population would’ve been accurate.
However, the researchers used a bit of amphibian DNA to make the process work and didn’t realize that some amphibians can actually change sex.
What that meant was that the entire time the researchers were counting up to what they assumed was the correct ”number”(Garbage In), the real number far outstripped their estimates as mating was occuring “in the wild” (Garbage Out).
As Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum ) put it – “Nature found a way”.
But Aren’t The Global Warming Skeptics Just Bought And Paid For By Big Oil?
Some skeptics have done work for Oil and Gas companies in the past. Some of the more famous ones no longer do any work for them and thus receive not 1 cent from Big Oil currently. These people have been scrutinized and examined and because their research largely cannot be dismissed, the “Climate Pornists” attempt to smear and discredit them.
What is ironic is that noone pays attention to the millions of dollars spent world-wide each year to fund “Climate Change” research. Scientists looking for a gravy train all know that all they have to do is somehow tie what they are researching into how it affects “Global Warming” and they can get a grant.
Yet, some skeptic who once got paid $5,000 for one day of consulting with Exxon is supposedly not to be trusted?
Who again is really “bought and paid for”?
My Conclusion?
The Earth has been warming and cooling itself for millenia without the help of humans. Just recently a small village was discovered at the bottom on the English channel. The melting of the glaciers from the last Ice Age contributed to the rise in sea levels and the submerging of this village. Once someone shows me the 15,000 year old SUV’s that caused this warming which caused the ice to melt, I’ll sign onto the Climate Porn revolution.
I’ll leave with this excerpt from an email I just received today referencing this article. The email reads (in part);
Interesting viewpoint in this article if you care to read it.
I think we will see more of this type of reporting soon. I wonder if anyone will ask for Al Gore’s “the sky is falling” Nobel Prize back when they realize he misled them into a rash prediction? I know this is from Fox News so it will get the skeptical eye from a more liberal discerning viewer but not too long ago, even Fox was reporting on Global Warming. I remember discussing this with a few people about the research I did in college, while I was a scientist, and here within the last few years.
Anyone that wants to lower fossil fuel emissions as a means to lower emissions that are poisonous to my body has my full support. Tie it to an idea that we humans are causing global warming and I have to disagree. Then tie it to a reason to take money out of my pocket to fund a new urban myth causing mass hysteria and I start getting annoyed.
It is quite probable that I will get responses that differ in opinion which is fine, but please remember I never drank the “Global Warming Koolaid” once these reports start coming in more frequency. The news agencies don’t sell papers by telling the whole truth. They sell newspapers by getting a group of middle aged, middle income people together and telling them what to be afraid of and who is to blame for it.Getting a critical mass of people to start shaking their heads up and down, and you have a group of voters that someone needs to appeal to. It snowballs from there, and in the meantime wastes time, effort, and money that we could be solving real problems.
You, of course, are free to make up your own mind.
Have fun!
-Thai
Comments
6 Responses to “Let The “Global Cooling” Begin!”
Leave a Reply
dugg it
Thai – Good stuff. Of course, I’m a habitual fence rider when it comes to global warming. I have the luxury of remembering a time when we were being warned not of global warming but the impending ice age we’d be facing in a few years. Seems the fear mongering never ends, they just change the theme now and again to keep it exciting.
I’m still of the mindset that we’re entirely too primitive to predict much, especially when the system is a complicated as planetary climate. I’ve yet to see a weather report more than a week in advance that was even remotely accurate. So the criticism goes both ways… I don’t have faith in either side if the claims made are stated with authority. Unless they authoritatively state it’s a complete guessing game for everybody.
Excellent post, though.
ToxicDave – Thanks! I think we can all agree that there is much we don’t know. And the more we do know, the more we realize that we don’t know.
To put the whole Climate Change issue into perspective vis-a-vis the Peak Oil Crisis, everyone needs to ask themselves, their associates, all sitting elected officials and those seeking office, especially the office of President of the United States, “What is more threatening in both the long and short terms, a beneficial 1 degree F rise in average world temperatures over the past 100 years, or a 1 percent decline in world oil production over the last 100 weeks – with steepening declines forecast? Furthermore, can our economy better deal with declining fuel inventories in an environment of persistent warming, or in an environment of declining average temperatures over the next several decades, the most likely scenario given the highly reliable solar inertial motion (SIM) model forecasts of climate change?” Solar cycle # 24 will tell the tale. The problem is not AGW. The problem is the end of cyclical warming coincident with the onset of Peak Oil.
Well put, Thai.
Let’s really put this into perspective though. What is CO2? Fuel for plants, right? If CO2 were gaining in the atmosphere at the rate we are told, we would have weeds the size of telephone poles and tomatoes the size of basketballs.
Global Warming is nothing more than media sensationalism of atmospheric modeling “what if” games being executed on super computers. These scientists, in an effort to explain why they are unable to control everything within their reach (an egotistically generated problem), take a one square model of the earths surface and add atmospheric/environmental changes to see what will happen to the earths climate. They could use the super computer to accurately predict what will happen to the earth with a 9x% accuracy. However, to accurately predict what will happen tomorrow, the computer would need 20 years to process the information. The problem with what we are left with is that a one square mile model leaves much out of the equation, like El Nino, and La Nina.
For instance;
1) Microwave Effect – This happens when clouds build up and build up and trap the suns radiation between the clouds and the earths surface thus heating the area beneath it.
What the modeling fails to take into consideration is that once those clouds build up to the Cirrus layer, ice crystals are formed in the Cirrus clouds and REFLECT the suns radiation away from the earth thus cooling the same area beneath it.
2) Polar Ice Caps Melting due to CO2 emissions – Increase in CO2 for many reasons is causing the average temperature to rise which is melting the polar ice caps and causing our oceans to rise and the shores to change?
This one takes a lot more explanation for me;
- 80% of the world’s CO2 is recycled into O2 by the Ocean. So as the oceans become larger they would process more CO2, thus cooling the earths surface and returning the polar ice caps to their size and shape
- The oceans and land masses have been changing for many thousands upon thousands of years. Or have these scientists forgotten the work of their brethren who detailed that the world once was made up of a single land mass and one great Ocean?
- We have much less volcanic action for many reasons than we had just a few hundred years ago. Our CO2 emissions have not and will not equal the CO2 emissions of the volcanoes the world faced just a short time ago, so should not the earth be cooler?
- There is 15% more trees, believe it or not, in the US than there were in the 1960’s which is helping to process the CO2 back into Oxygen
3) Hole in the Ozone Layer – Really folks think about it, has anyone ever successfully been able to put a hole in gas not due to Nuclear Explosion?
4) Using Polar Ice Cap core samples scientists have been able to tell that the present average temperature this past century is 1/2 degree higher than it was a thousand years ago. The median fluctuations in temperature are normal and will change like a Sine Wave if you chart them. Take for instance that in the 1970’s scientists warned of the next Ice Age now we are being burned alive.
What we have here is a group of scientists and politicians who have successfully convinced enough people to be scared of something that we have no affect or control over. They tell enough facts to get people’s heads moving up and down, and then start with supposition and conjecture based on the what-if games they play on the computers.
Noone gets famous or sells newspapers by providing both sides of an argument and letting us poor regular people to make our own decisions. So what they do is take the side that is controversial and convince people that they need to be afraid of it, and tell them who is to blame for it. Then they try to come up with a plan on how to fix it so that they can make themselves famous, have people look to them for guidance, and possibly even earn the Nobel Peace Prize.
The fact of this whole global warming issue is that the earth is changing and we need to learn to evolve with it. Anyone who thinks we can stop the earth from evolving is egotistical, has an extremely high opinion of themselves and our abilities as humans, and is completely mistaken. Take any fact touted by the Global Warming “Sky is Falling” extremists and there is another fact that counteracts that in nature and brings equilibrium.
Get rid of pollution, sure! Think we can stop the earth, give me a break!
Very will put Jimbo.
AMEN !!