This is an organized effort to attack the reputation of the scientific community as a whole, to attack their integrity, and to slander them with the lie that they are making up the science in order to make money.[1]
He's at it again! Al Gore, vice president under Bill Clinton, was interviewed over the weekend about global warming. The Minuteman Redux has already noted his hypocrisy; we now have the pleasure to report his latest spin: He doesn't simply rail against those skeptical of man-made global warming theories, he compares the fight for global warming to the fight for civil rights in the South in the 1960s and implies that skeptics will one day be regarded the way intelligent Americans now view racists. Racists? Really? Well, not impossible, if we assume that man-made global warming is a fact. That, of course, is not an assumption we make.
Let's pull up a few facts about climate change that the Gore faction doesn't ever talk about [emphasis mine]:
The recent cooling observed after 1998 is probably caused by the Sun's activity, which recently dropped precipitously from its 60-year-long record in the second half of the 20th Century, the highest in the past 11 centuries, to an extremely low current level. . . . The unusually long period of low activity of the Sun suggests that we may be entering another Maunder Minimum, a period from 1645 to 1715 when almost no sunspots were visible. This was the coldest part of the Little Ice Age (1250-1900), when rivers in Europe and America were often frozen, and the Baltic Sea was crossed on ice by armies and travelers. [2]
What we live in now is known as an interglacial, a relatively brief period between long ice ages. Unfortunately for us, most interglacial periods last only about ten thousand years, and that is how long it has been since the last Ice Age ended. How much longer do we have before the ice begins to spread across the Earth's surface? Less than a hundred years or several hundred? We simply don't know. Even if all the temperature increase over the last century is attributable to human activities, the rise has been relatively modest one of a little over one degree Fahrenheit — an increase well within natural variations over the last few thousand years. While an enduring temperature rise of the same size over the next century would cause humanity to make some changes, it would undoubtedly be within our ability to adapt. Entering a new ice age, however, would be catastrophic for the continuation of modern civilization. [3]
These are not crazy people; these comments come from respected journalists and scientists.
"But, what about the glaciers and the polar bears?"
Glad you asked.
"But, what about the glaciers and the polar bears?"
Glad you asked.
Glaciers
The U.N. alarmingly claimed in 2007 that certain Himalayan glaciers would melt away by 2035 – presumed victims of "global warming." It later retracted that absurd claim. Now a study by scientists at the University of California at Santa Barbara and the University of Potsdam, Germany, says most glaciers in the Karakoram range of the Himalayas are stable or getting bigger. It seems the mighty Himalayas shed debris on the glaciers, insulating them and preventing melting. While glaciers in other areas of the Himalayas have shrunk, "Our study shows that there is no uniform response of Himalayan glaciers to climate change," the authors wrote in the journal Nature Geoscience. That's something to remember when environmental activists insist that the science of "global warming" is "settled." [4]
By the way, if you're as old as I am, you might recall the late 1970s media hype about the coming Ice Age, including a Time Magazine cover story, and increasing glaciers back then. It seems like times don't always change.
Polar Bears
The polar bear (ursus maritmus or "sea bear" for the scientifically inclined), are on the verge of extinction, according to conservation organizations. Even the US Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) says there are only 22,000 to 25,000 bears remaining in the Arctic. But wait! You have to read the facts behind the story. An FWS report (along with a whole lot of additional information) is available on the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee website, which indicates that 25,000 polar bears is not bad news:
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service estimates that the polar bear population is currently at 20,000 to 25,000 bears, up from as low as 5,000-10,000 bears in the 1950s and 1960s. A 2002 U.S. Geological Survey of wildlife in the Arctic Refuge Coastal Plain noted that the polar bear populations "may now be near historic highs." The alarm about the future of polar bear decline is based on speculative computer model predictions many decades in the future. And the methodology of these computer models is being challenged by many scientists and forecasting experts. [5]
That's a 100% to 500% increase in only two or three generations – polar bears start breeding between 4 and 8 years old and live about 25 years. I remind you, this is an official US government agency report to the United States Senate. Not the kind of thing you want to get wrong, if you like the idea of continuing as a federal employee.
I used to collect anti-man-made global warming articles. I gave up after collecting five or six dozen because it became so obvious that this whole thing was a load of manure. Much of the man-made global warming hype is based on their "hockey stick" graph.
If you look at the last 1,000 years, it looks like Al Gore is right (oh, what an awful thing to have to say, even in jest!). If you look at the last 400,000 years, you see enough temperature change "hockey sticks" (the blue line) to keep the NHL running for a whole season. When you start with a false premise, your chances of reaching a true conclusion are pretty close to nil.
And that, friends, is what the whole man-made global warming house of cards comprises – false premises, bad science and media hype. As I said to a friend recently about the fall of global warming:
It wasn't the fact that the scientists claiming it were lying.
It wasn't the fact that the activists promoting it were lying.
It wasn't the fact that the politicians legislating it were lying.
It wasn't the fact that the journalists covering it were lying.
It was the fact that we found out about the lie!
Easy – and politically correct as it would be – I simply cannot subscribe to the notion that humanity has a bigger effect on Earth's climate than the 868,000-mile-wide thermonuclear explosion that is sitting 93,000,000 miles off our bow.
By the way, since I don't want to do all the work for you, I suggest you do some digging of your own to figure out what the eviro-wackos are up to, meaning, why are they promoting these lies? What's their end game, their goal? When you do, write me a note of 1,000-1,500 clever words and maybe you can win a spot as a guest commentator on the cyberspace equivalent of Lexington Green.
Thanks for listening, tune in next week for another rant.
[1] Caroline May, "Gore: Global Warming Skeptics Are This Generation's Racists," The Daily Caller
[2] Zbigniew Jaworowski, "The Sun, Not Man, Still Rules Our Climate," 21st Century Science & Technology Magazine. Spring 2009. <http://www.21stcenturysciencetech.com/Articles_2009/Sun_Climate_sp09.pdf>.
[3] Gerald E. Marsh, "The Coming of a New Ice Age," Winningreen.com, 2011. <http://www.winningreen.com/site/epage/59549_621.htm>.
[4] "Himalayan glaciers expanding?" Chattanooga Times Free Press, 14 February 2011. <http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/feb/14/himalayan-glaciers-expanding/>.
[5] "U.S. Senate Report Debunks Polar Bear Extinction Fears," U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, January 30, 2008. <http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=d6c6d346-802a-23ad-436f-40eb31233026>.
No comments:
Post a Comment