By Richard Larsen
Published – Idaho State Journal, 01/06/08
I find it immensely interesting that so many of those who are ardent proponents of man-made global warming are also the ones who scoff at the faith of those of us who are religiously oriented. After all, it takes faith to believe in a deity, and the tenets of our respective theologies, yet those who swallow the global warming alarmist message are exercising faith in the proposition that man is slowly destroying the planet by pumping CO2 emissions into the environment, because there is no more science behind that proposition than there is behind a theological claim for the origin of the universe. They’re both based on faith.
Somehow a notion of “consensus” has dominated the discussion about scientists involved in global warming studies. This notion maintains that all scientists concur with the proposition that by emitting carbon dioxide (which we humans emit every time we exhale), we are pushing the world toward an environmental Armageddon of extreme weather vacillations, over-heated atmosphere, global melt-down of all the glaciers, and dramatic rising of oceanic water levels that will eradicate massive populations in coastal areas.
Release of a detailed report by 400 scientists around the world who take exception with the global warming alarmist claims proves that there is no consensus and that the debate is not over. It seems that claims of consensus are designed to stifle debate, minimize the “deniers,” and solidify support for massive political power grabs.
The current level of hysteria surrounding the claims of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is, according to one of those scientists, “…a search for a mythical CO2 sink to explain an immeasurable CO2 lifetime to fit a hypothetical CO2 computer model that purports to show that an impossible amount of fossil fuel burning is heating the atmosphere. It is all a fiction,” according to Geochemist Dr. Tom Segalstad from Norway, who was an expert reviewer with the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
Climatologist Dr. Marcel Leroux, director of the Laboratory of Climatology, Risks, and Environment in Lyon, France says in the report, “Day after day, the same mantra - that ‘the Earth is warming up’ - is churned out in all its forms. As ‘the ice melts’ and ‘sea level rises,’ the Apocalypse looms ever nearer! Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average citizen is bamboozled, lobotomized, lulled into mindless acceptance.”
Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University, states “First, temperature changes, as well as rates of temperature changes (both increase and decrease) of magnitudes similar to that reported by IPCC to have occurred since the Industrial revolution (about 0.8C in 150 years or even 0.4C in the last 35 years) and have occurred previously in Earth's climatic history. There's nothing special about the recent rise!”
Chief Meteorologist Eugenio Hackbart of the MetSul Meteorologia Weather Center in Brazil is quoted saying, “The media is promoting an unprecedented hyping related to global warming. The media and many scientists are ignoring very important facts that point to a natural variation in the climate system as the cause of the recent global warming.”
Madhav Khandekar, a PhD meteorologist and scientist with the Natural Resources Stewardship Project with over 45 years of experience in climatology, meteorology and oceanography expressed dismay over how the IPCC report authors ignored most of the scientific evidence presented to the committee proving natural elements cause the majority of the current slight warming cycle. As he said, “This is not an acceptable scientific review process.”
IPCC reviewer and climate researcher Dr. Vincent Gray from New Zealand summarizes the IPCC reporting process well. “The [IPCC] ‘Summary for Policymakers’ might get a few readers, but the main purpose of the report is to provide a spurious scientific backup for the absurd claims of the worldwide environmentalist lobby that it has been established scientifically that increases in carbon dioxide are harmful to the climate. It just does not matter that this isn’t so.”
Dr. Kelvin Kemm, a South African scientist aptly describes the main-stream media hyping of the issue. “The global-warming mania continues with more and more hype and less and less thinking. With religious zeal, people look for issues or events to blame on global warming,” he said.
Regarding the science, or lack thereof, behind the IPCC report, Dr. Richard Courtney, another UN IPCC expert reviewer said, “To date, no convincing evidence for AGW has been discovered. And recent global climate behavior is not consistent with AGW model predictions.”
Regarding the CO2 arguments for global warming, Belgian climate scientist Luc Debontridder authored a peer reviewed study in August in which he claims “CO2 is not the big bogeyman of climate change and global warming. Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas. It is responsible for at least 75 % of the greenhouse effect. This is a simple scientific fact, but Al Gore's movie has hyped CO2 so much that nobody seems to take note of it."
You can review the lengthy report in it’s entirety on the U.S. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee website.
If you are weary and wary of the hyped and catastrophic doom saying of the climate change alarmists, don’t feel alone. As indicated above, not only are you in good company with some of the most acclaimed scientists around the world, but there is no consensus on the issue, the science is not settled, and it should not be closed to debate.
As BBC Science Correspondent David Whitehouse said in a recent column, “Global warming has, temporarily or permanently, ceased. Temperatures across the world are not increasing as they should according to the fundamental theory behind global warming – the greenhouse effect. Something else is happening and it is vital that we find out what or else we may spend hundreds of billions of pounds needlessly. The science is fascinating, the ramifications profound, but we are fools if we think we have a sufficient understanding of such a complicated system as the Earth’s atmosphere’s interaction with sunlight to decide. We know far less than many think we do or would like you to think we do. We must explain why global warming has stopped.”