Thursday, January 18, 2007

Global Warming vs The First Amendment

Hedi Cullen, Weather Channel "Climate Expert", has proposed that all meteorologists that disagree with the theory of man-made global warming be decertified by the American Meteorological Society. Her comments are particularly interesting, in light of yesterday's snowfall in Malibu. Amazing, the concept of global warming is so important, that Ms. Cullen feels that those who disagree should be stripped of their livelihood for having the audacity to express an alternate theory.

Well, given that we were told of the "coming Ice Age" at the first Earth Day, I'm not so sure we can trust these climatologists. It is only the hubris to believe we have a complete understanding of something so complex as the Earth's climate, and all it's interactions (including the Sun, if I'm not mistaken.) I suppose it wouldn't look good on one's resume to have an article entitled "Earth's Climate - We've Got No Clue."

As a result, the so called "experts" will do as they always have done, working to ostracize those who disagree. After all, we know that the Earth is flat, the atom is indivisible, and Al Gore was really elected in Florida. So I suppose that the elimination of all competing theories is perfectly acceptable. Unless, of course, one has tenure - but more on that at a later date.

Margaritas ante Porcos,
Right Wing Toledo

8 comments:

Pink_Slip said...

I agree, we shouldn't trust the climatologists. We should only trust the facts. There is direct causation between the amount of co2 in the atmosphere and temperature (at least, there has been for more than 650,000 years). And increased co2 in our atmosphere means warmer temperatures. And the amount of co2 in our atmosphere has increased exponentially since the Industrial Revolution. What will happen if it continues unfettered? We don't know, however MOST agree it can't be good. I also agree we shouldn't silence those who deny the facts. They discredit themselves.

Right Wing Toledo said...

I think that you are mistaking correlation with causation. Yes, there is positive correlation between CO2 and ambient air temperature. However, to assume that this is the causing factor is a bit premature. Heliologists have indicated that the Sun is currently going through a more active period, with increasing sunspot activity and radiation – meaning more heat for those of us on poor terra firma. In fact, the major source for the “increasing temperature” post-Industrial Revolution comes from the Mike Mann “Hockey Stick” diagram featured, I believe, in June 2006. During a study, paleoclimatologists uniformly announced their inability to accurately deduce global temperature within 0.5 degrees Celsius for the past 1,000 years (to use a smaller timeframe would fail to show a statistical deviance with any significance.) The only one to disagree, and state that he (and apparently he alone) could produce such results was Mike Mann. So much for consensus.

Reality presents a different picture. I suggest you check out "The Little Ice Age and Medieval Warm Period in the Sargasso Sea", in Science, 29 Nov 1996. The medieval period was apparently much warmer, and for a longer period, then it currently is. And to say that man is even responsible for the majority of CO2 in the atmosphere is a bit extreme. All the SUVs, and all the automobiles in the world don’t equal the CO2 produced by one volcano – and I’m pretty sure Americans aren’t responsible for those.

But, as to your point about discrediting – I believe that many around Christopher Columbus said that he would discredit himself by sailing off the edge of the world. I feel positive that someone said the same thing to Erik the Red, but I don’t have a source to back it up.

Pink_Slip said...

I think the key is to determine if indeed more co2 means increased temperatures, or is it vice-versa. From what I have read, it is both. When the temperature decreases, the cooler oceans are able to dissolve more co2. And then less co2 leads to cooler temperatures, as more of the sun's rays are able to escape back into space. And then the process is the opposite if it gets warmer, or if more co2 builds up in the atmosphere. It's a constant exchange. If you look at the CO2/temp graphs for the last 650,000 years from the Vostok ice cores you'll see sometimes the warmer temperature leads the co2 increase, and sometimes it lags the co2 increase.

However, the co2 levels have always been between 180-280ppm throughout this span. Now it is close to 400ppm. Your point of volcanos creating more co2 doesn't bear out, since the co2 levels are higher right now than at any other point in the last half-million years plus despite all the volcanic activity we've had in this time.

The correlation/causation argument is eerily similar to the lung cancer/smoking debate of years past in my opinion.

I view this as an exciting opportunity for us to further explore the renewables energies, and the advances this will lead too (not to mention the decrease in dependencies of foreign oil). Didn't Friedman say we can't win the war on terror when we're funding both sides. I'm getting off track here, but thanks.

Right Wing Toledo said...

And warmer tempratures lead to longer growing seasons for many plants, leading to a lower CO2 level, correct? By your premise, the Earth should have become a runaway temperature/CO2 cycle eons ago. My comment point is that simply, we do not know, and to make rash decisions based not on knowledge, but rather a "feeling" is both irresponsible and dangerous. Scientists are more and more beginning to admit that human CO2 production does not account for the difference.

Hooda Thunkit said...

Heidi Cullen, so called “Climate Expert” has an extremely high opinion of her opinion.

Funny, I watch the weather quite a bit and have no clue as to who she is.

That alone, in my book, says all that I need to know about this so called Climate Expert. . .

Pink_Slip said...

No, it hasn't become a runaway effect for other reasons which include irregularities in the Earth's orbit, solar flares that you spoke of, etc. As far as the growing seasons for plant life, I would agree more if we weren't living in an era of deforestation. The bottome line is that we have upset the natural balance that has been maintained for at least a half-million years. And LESS scientists disagree that there are way more co2 emissions now, and that we are causing it. Even on the government's EPA site @ www.epa.gov

Take a look at this graph (halfway down):

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/science/pastcc.html

Ask someone to chart where they think the blue line (temperature) will go in relation to the red line (CO2) based on past data of half a million years. Even the layperson would agree that this line will go up.

-Sepp said...

They have been recording the Earth's average tempretures for about 100 years and base their entire theory on a 2 degree rise since 1888. The Earth has been constantly warming and cooling in trends since the beginning of time. Check out an archeology dig and see the layers in the rock where warming and cooling have taken place...according to the guys with PHD's who supervise the digs.

Pink_Slip said...

sepp--we are able to determine the Earth's temperatures from ice cores that date back 650,000 years