Global warming activists like Al Gore are shrill in their proclamations that an increase of CO2 in the atmosphere from about 280 to 380 parts per million over about 150 years doom life on Earth unless we immediately sign up for drastic reductions in economic activity and support global redistribution of wealth. They are indignant when challenged to debate the science of climate. “The science is settled,” they say. People that question them are compared to Holocaust deniers.
This dogmatic position goes against the openness to inquiry and new evidence that has been so important to increasing our understanding of the world over the past few centuries. Watts Up with That? is a website that offers a wealth of resources and balanced debate to anyone who wants to understand more about the complexities of the Earth’s climate.
A recent post, presents a long paper describing the earth’s climate engine and analyzing recent changes in climate. This is challenging reading and is sometimes difficult to follow if you are not a climatologist. However, the author presents an accessible conclusion that summarizes the facts and provides his views on what drives the current debate that is worth reading for anyone interested in the threats posed by the global warming fanatics. I have taken the liberty to highlight some of the important conclusions.
Between 1948 and 1976 the tropics and the globe as a whole was fairly stable in temperature with obvious cooling discernable in the decade prior to 1976. From 1977 through to 2000 the tropics and the globe warmed. By comparing data from the earlier period with that for the later period one can discern change in the atmosphere that resulted in more solar radiation reaching the surface of the earth causing it to warm.
Atmospheric conditions in the near earth environment are strongly influenced by the sun. The observed warming of the last decades of the twentieth century can be attributed to natural influences. There is no evidence of any warming signature due to the increased presence of so called ‘greenhouses gases’. It is suggested that the greenhouse hypothesis takes little cognizance of the manner in which the atmosphere actually functions. The atmosphere cools the planet but a change in its temperature causes a change in ice crystal density and the quantum of radiation reaching the surface.
Climatic models suggest that any greenhouse effect should be strongest in the tropical upper troposphere where water vapor is in higher concentration. In point of fact warming of the upper troposphere at the equator is less likely as the globe warms because the quantum of outgoing radiation diminishes as convection and de-compressive cooling is enhanced. It is in the subtropics that outgoing long wave radiation increases and in particular in the high pressure cells where the air is descending and warming and the sky tends to be cloud -free both in terms of liquid and ice crystal density. A water vapor feedback mechanism would require an increase in specific humidity levels in these high pressure areas. The reverse is observed. If a greenhouse effect were present it would be unamplified and tiny. Any warming tendency in these areas is more likely to be due to a loss of ice cloud density than a greenhouse effect.
If the Earth enters a period of cooling, as it has since 1998, it suggests that the natural factor is pre-eminent. If there is a strong relationship between ice cloud density and surface temperature it confirms the point that moisture in the upper troposphere cools rather than warms the planet and the basis of the greenhouse feedback mechanism is negated. Without a water vapor amplifier a change in so called ‘greenhouse gas’ levels can have little or no effect upon surface temperature.
If we can rid ourselves of the foolish mantra that surface temperature is governed by so called greenhouse gas, much unnecessary pain can be avoided. We are threatened by zealous governments keen to interfere in markets, raise taxation and redistribute incomes. The absurd notion that carbon is a pollutant is daily promoted. ‘Will of the wisp’ schemes to generate renewable energy burden the public purse. Nothing is to be gained by these stratagems. Innovation has its own rewards and investment in all forms of innovation is already well enough subsidized and feverishly exploited. Man needs no urging to innovate and will do so quite happily in the absence of artificially inflated monetary incentives. The introduction of market distorting incentives and disincentives destroys rather than creates wealth. This is the tool of the central planner, the social activist, the miscreant.
Distraction and absurdity are our unhappy lot, parading as morality and virtue. Snake oil salesmen multiply by the minute. These are unfortunate times.
There are none so blind as those who will not see. The authority of ‘Science’ and the United Nations organization has been subverted to the activists cause. This is a sorry time for mankind. It is a time when belief is substituted for science and the two are irretrievably tangled and confused.
Previous Florida Pundit posts on global warming:
Obama Poised to Cede US Sovereignty in Copenhagen?
Don’t Freak Out! The Bear is Fine
Al Gore Continues to Peddle Global Warming Hysteria
How Statistics Are Used to Lie About Global Warming
What Happened to Global Warming?
{ 2 trackbacks }
{ 0 comments… add one now }