It’s like this global warming has stalled – or has it. If it has, global warming advocates refuse to even consider the possibility that their computer models have been wrong – or have they?
“...For several years, scientists wrote off the stall as noise in the climate system: the natural variations in the atmosphere, oceans and biosphere that drive warm or cool spells around the globe. But the pause has persisted, sparking a minor crisis of confidence in the field. Although there have been jumps and dips, average atmospheric temperatures have risen little since 1998, in seeming defiance of projections of climate models and the ever-increasing emissions of greenhouse gases. Climate sceptics have seized on the temperature trends as evidence that global warming has ground to a halt. Climate scientists, meanwhile, know that heat must still be building up somewhere in the climate system, but they have struggled to explain where it is going, if not into the atmosphere. Some have begun to wonder whether there is something amiss in their models.
Now, as the global-warming hiatus enters its sixteenth year, scientists are at last making headway in the case of the missing heat. Some have pointed to the Sun, volcanoes and even pollution from China as potential culprits, but recent studies suggest that the oceans are key to explaining the anomaly. The latest suspect is the El Niño of 1997–98, which pumped prodigious quantities of heat out of the oceans and into the atmosphere — perhaps enough to tip the equatorial Pacific into a prolonged cold state that has suppressed global temperatures ever since….”
Let’s get something straight, from the very beginning. Climate change is very real. It is not a theory. It is a given. It is scientific, geologic, historical, and climatic fact. Many factors are involved, including sunspots, ocean currents, and volcanic activity. Catastrophic climate change can come from an astronomical incident. It happens. The planet warms and it cools. It can be tracked throughout recorded history. (This site that shows a history of British weather is fascinating.) My problem is with global warming.
No, I don’t completely disagree with it. I am well aware that atmospheric pollution is major contributor to the problem. Even if it were not a factor in climate change, it is a factor in any number of issues about ill health. It contributes to the poisoning of our air and our water. Even if I did not agree with climate change, any thinking person would want the place where we live to be as clean as possible.
Something is going on with our climate. The problem with that statement is that, down through recorded history, something has been going on with weather and climate. Once upon a time, weather, climate was attributed to the gods, to lore and superstition. Zeus had his thunderbolts. Poseidon brought flooding. The gods must be appeased to provide for the annual flooding of the Nile, for the rains, for crops. People created explanations for what they did not understand. In this way, people today are no different than they were at the dawn of civilization and even as civilization began to awaken.
We want logical explanations for why the world works. We always have and we always will. The difference between modern humans and primitive ones is the scientific method, and not much else. Oh, we have a greater sophistication, but people are still grasping at straws. They want to believe something. There are well-educated scientists who have managed to turn global warming into their own form of depression.
Global Warming advocates who are true believers are, according to my own personal experiences, nasty, rude, vile bullies who will do anything to destroy a person’s reputation. One of their favorite forms of attack is to go after a person’s credentials or lack there of. I experienced their attacks, personally, on Monday. If one does not have extensive scientific credentials and degrees in the sciences of their choosing, you are to be destroyed, ridiculed, and generally harassed until you no longer will stand up to them, or even question them. I don’t care who a person is, or what their background is, they don’t need to be treated so vilely.
It is a very hot political issue. It is fraught with hysteria, hyperbole, and borderline insanity. Everyone has an agenda. There are liberals, conservatives, libertarians, and everyone in between. If you don’t have a score-card, you don’t know which agenda is which. That’s the real problem here. Who is paying for what? Frankly, I don’t believe anything that comes out of the Koch Machine. I am just as skeptical of anything that comes from anyone associated with Greenpeace, or other extremely liberal environmental organizations. There aren’t many sources you can believe. Their credentials must be checked, agendas exposed, and then, you give their work some consideration. Both sides will lie, cheat, and manipulate their work to the point where one must decipher every little word and nuance. You no longer know who to believe. Is there a bias against skeptics?
Just using the following quote will damn me to hell in the minds of the global warming religious zealot.
“…If one accepts the thesis that the planet faces a threat unprecedented in history, the implications are mind-boggling. But equally mind-boggling now are the implications of the price we are being asked to pay by our politicians to meet that threat. More than ever, it is a matter of the highest priority that we should know whether or not the assumptions on which the politicians base their proposals are founded on properly sound science“…” Christopher Booker, 2009
This is my problem with the science of global warming and dealing with recorded temperature. The problem: On record is quoted as being from 1880 until today. Humans – Homo sapiens – have been been around for about 160,000 years, give or take, sort of. Climactic temperature has been accurately recorded since 1880. Am I the only hard-headed person who has a problem with creating an entire science, making massive pronouncements and societal change on 135 years of science? That’s 135/160,000 Sorry, but that’s not science, that’s a belief, or a theory.
We have a serious problem with climate change on our planet. I am of the ilk who think it is primarily caused by nature, but certainly hasn’t been helped by nasty polluting humans who don’t give a damn about how they’ve trashed the planet. Making blanket assumptions when dealing with 135 years of the 160,000 years that modern man has been on the planet is not science. It’s not logical. It is blanket assumption. It is ignoring the other 159,865 years of modern man.
Something is wrong with this picture. I’m not saying global warming doesn’t exist. What I’m saying is that it is utterly foolish to make assumptions based on such a short span of time. If we were dealing with rocketry, forget it. Same thing with geology, chemistry, and even biology.
This isn’t science, it is mythology. It is the realm of true believers. When you have true believers, they hold on to their legend, myth, and their religion. They become a cult. In order to hold on to what they believe, even with the possibility that there might be something wrong with it, they must believe even stronger. They must attack anyone who dares question their belief – not the actual science – but their belief. When you dare question their belief, you must be destroyed.
Are we watching the birth of a new religion? If so, it’s a shame. You can’t do real science when dealing with true believers. Science relies on the honor of skeptics. When dealing with a scientific assumptions, you lose the ability to make decisions which might not be accurate. Science, real science relies on accuracy. When critics or those of us who are not true believers, who have not bought into the orthodoxy, dare speak out, we must be bullied into submission. It makes me wonder why the true believers fear an opposing opinion.