Site Search

Custom Search

Monday, April 30, 2012

Global warming: unsettled science

One of the world’s foremost environmentalists has told MSNBC that his past views on global warming were “alarmist,” as, he said, were the views of other environmental commentators such as Al Gore. James Lovelock—who authored the Gaia theory—admitted, “The problem is we don’t know what the climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago. That led to some alarmist books—mine included—because it looked clear-cut, but it hasn’t happened.”

Lovelock, a hero to the green movement, also acknowledged that temperatures haven’t increased as expected over the last 12 years. “There’s nothing much really happening yet. We were supposed to be halfway toward a frying world now,” he said.

Not surprisingly, this major story is not receiving much attention in the mainstream media.

© 2012 Russell G. Campbell

 

 

1 comment — This is a moderated blog and comments will appear when approved. Please don’t resubmit if your comment doesn’t appear immediately, and please do not post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable.

  1. It always amazes me that people look at the short term only -- 26,000 to 13,000 years ago the ice was 4 km thick on alot of North America -- that has been melting ever since, and thus raising sea levels all along. I somehow doubt that was all due to the influence of man. It amazes me that people use glaciers as a warning sign -- well yes, they have been melting for 13,000+ years. well d'ohhh. Do we want to return to that period of the 4 km of ice cover?

    I believe there is climate change occurring, in fact the earth is a dynamic system that is not static and is constantly changing. Over the entire history of the earth, climate has warmed up over some periods of time and other times it has cooled. It appears to be part of some cyclical change of climate due to yet to be determined factors. The Planet is change, thus the climate changes over time. Lazy scientists love static systems because they are easy to model.

    The science is not "settled" on what causes it -- many theories exist, but some how the environmentalist movement has hijacked the science and have taken a Luddite position that man is to blame. There may be other agendas at play when Canadian industry & power generation is attacked but these same groups remain very silent on pollution excesses in China. I have been in Beijing where I could not even see across the street because of the smog. Hey that pollution does settle in the Rockies thus the source of drinking water on the Prairies. Why do these groups remain so silent on that source of pollution?

    It is criminal to model climate change on 150 years of directly measured climate data and extrapolate it to a planet that is 4+ billion years old and come to a conclusion, never-mind thus blame it on humans. I seem to remember there was a mini-ice-age in the 1600's -- what caused that?

    There are many factors such as the wobble of the earth, variations in magnetic fields, variations in sun intensity, the solar cycle of 11+ years (preliminary observations of only a dozen or so years), volcanic activity, asteroids, variations in oceanic currents, even the path of the solar system thru the galaxy as contrary to popular opinion, vacuum of space is not necessarily a vacuum and do contain particles and gases and ice from various asteroid belts and expulsion of matter from the sun and we are only scratching the surface on what effect that has on earth. The earth is a dynamic laboratory which scientists have been given access to a minute fraction of the data available and even a smaller understanding of the relevance of such data.

    I no doubt missed a good dozen or so parameters.

    Problem is too many people have tried to simplify the complex environment the earth is with very narrow parameters instead of looking at the big picture.

    Science is not so easy as to model as David Suzuki, a geneticist, would like to make you think. I should open a foundation. :) I would also like to own one home never-mind several homes and travel courtesy of the taxpayer a la CBC. Give me a break.

    Science takes time and can't be settled in a dozen or so years. These are all theories and need to be treated as such. Hard data is required and 150 years of hard data does not equate to the 4+ billions years of the planets existence -- the rest is just theories & speculation. Time will tell.

    I will remind people that it was once believed that if one traveled to far west over the Atlantic, one would fall off the edge of the world.

    I think Lovelock is one of those people who extrapolated limited data without understanding the big picture. I will give him credit for admitting he was wrong.

    Gerry

    ReplyDelete

ShareThis