There is no debate among scientists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
The physics and chemistry is well understood. The models are not perfect but every single one, all independent, agree to within a few per cent. The physics of CO2 and other greenhouse gases absorbing re-radiated energy from the ground is well understood. The feedback mechanisms (glacial melting, permafrost release of CO2, etc.) are not as well understood, but we've consistently been predicting slower than-reality-feedbacks.
Their first claimed "PhD" on the list is someone who believes in Intelligent Design; these people are not scientists and do not understand science.
The earth's climate is changing faster than it ever has before and it is due to humans. If we don't get our heads out of the sand, all of us are going to be irrelevant. I didn't know that I should even bother refuting the points, as they've been refuted time and time again. But, I will because I assume nobody who reads this is completely lost to reality.
1) The average temperature of our earth has been unchanged for the last 10 years, and in fact is now trending downward.
Not true. http://earthobservatory.nasa.
http://www.metoffice.gov.uk/
2) CO² is only 3.6 percent of the total greenhouse gasses, when water vapor, the largest greenhouse gas is included. Only ..117 percent of this CO² is manmade. This small amount of CO² makes little difference in our global temperature.
Currently, CO2 concentration is 384 parts per million by volume (ppmv). That's 35% (100 ppmv) higher than it was in 1832. Most of the increase is due to the industrial revolution and modern-day use of fossil fuels--humans. I don't know what "..117 percent" means. I assume they mean one of 0.117%, 1.17%, or 11.7%, none of which are true. During the Cretaceous (146 to 65 million years ago), the average CO2 concentration was 340 ppmv. That's less than what it is
now, but the average temperature was about 5 degrees C higher than it is now. Why? The difference is that the cretaceous had 10 million years or so for CO2 to stabilize at 340 ppmv and begin decreasing, and for temperatures to increase. We've had since 1832 for the CO2 concentration to increase 100 ppmv. The temperatures have not yet begun to increase significantly.
The Earth is not going to melt because of our activities, but things are going to change, and the rate at which natural systems will have to evolve is increasing and those systems are falling behind. For an example, see here:
http://judson.blogs.nytimes.
CO2 concentration absolutely makes a difference in global temperature. The physics of how it works is relatively simple, and the Venusian atmosphere is a perfect example of a runaway greenhouse atmosphere. Water vapor, methane, ozone, and a few others are also significant
greenhouse gases. Water vapor and methane are actually stronger greenhouse gases than CO2. If it weren't for these greenhouse gases, the average temperature of the earth would be about -18 degrees C (0 F). Because of greenhouse gases, the average temperature is 15C. However, in the past 200 years, we've warmed approximately 2 degrees C
3) In fact the earth has only warmed 1/10th of a degree due to CO² since the industrial revolution, and has=2 0warmed only one (1) degree in the last 150 years from all causes.
The average temperature from 1906 to 2005 has increased by 0.74 degrees C. The rate of warming over the last 50 years of that period was almost double the rate for the whole period.
Here are some things that happen at ~2 degrees C warming:
- Weather patterns worldwide will change (unpredictably, and happening now)
- Fresh water will be lost for ~1/3 of the world's land surface (aquifer
- levels in US southwest, Saudi Arabia, China are crashing right now)
- Permanent droughts in the US southwest, Australia, and Africa (happening now)
- Sea levels will rise 1.2 meters or so (some due to temperature
- increase of the oceans, and a lot due to melting ice; sea levels have already risen.)
- Wheat, corn, rice yields are dropping by about 10% (global food reserve was at less than 62 days and declining in 2008)
Back to answering these points:
4) The primary reason that CO² is ineffective in warming our earth is because the CO² absorption band in the atmosphere is almost saturated, so adding more CO² has little effect.
This makes no sense. The CO2 absorption band cannot BE "saturated". It's just a frequency of light that CO2 absorbs. The re-radiated energy from the Earth's surface and the sun provide that light, and there's not enough CO2 in the entire earth to "saturate" that band. This is nonsense.
5) CO² is not a harmful gas to humans, even though it has been declared a pollutant. It is a vital fertilizer to plant life. To be harmful to humans the concentration would need to be 6,000 parts per
million. We are at 380 PPM at present. The average CO² concentration
in submarines is 4,000 PPM and this does not make the submariners
sick.
What does a submarine have to do with the earth's atmosphere. We're not talking about toxicity. We're talking about energy absorption and retention, something completely different from toxicity. Plants need it, yes, but they evolved to use CO2 in concentrations of around 200 to 300 ppmv, not 400+ ppmv. At too high a temperature, plants start to release CO2, not absorb it.
Toxicity of CO2 from: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.
CO2 is a simple asphyxiant and lethal asphyxiations have been reported at concentrations as low as 110,000 ppm (Hamilton and Hardy 1974). Loss of consciousness can occur within a minute of exposure at 300,000 ppm and within 5-10 minutes (min) of exposure at 100,000 ppm (HSDB 2004). The effects of concentrations of CO2 between 7,000 and 300,000 ppm in humans and animals are discussed below and include tremor, headaches, chest pain, respiratory and cardiovascular effects, and visual and other central nervous system (CNS) effects.
6) Remember that greenhouse gasses act by absorbing heat, then reradiating it back to earth. The greenhouse alarmists have developed a computer model that predicts, due to the action of gasses, there
will be a “hot spot” in the atmosphere at a height of 12 kilometers.
Actual balloon measurements show no such “hot spot.” This and other
alarmist models have proven to be wrong and erratic.
He's talking about the tropopause. This report: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/
7) If we can’t predict next week’s weather, how=2 0can we predict the climate years in the future?
Weather and climate are very different. We cannot predict what any one person will do at a rock concert (go to the bathroom, watch the show, make out with a stranger), but we can predict that the crowd will be watching the show.
8) Polar ice melts and refreezes on a regular cycle with the low point occurring in September in the Northern Hemisphere and March in the Southern Hemisphere. All the melting reported by alarmists in the
Northern Hemisphere in September will be restored in March, year after
year!
Umm. No. The thickness and coverage of the arctic ice has decreased dramatically over time, even during its annual maximum extent. Yes, it melts and refreezes, but each time it refreezes, there's less and less, with a linear trend of -8.7% per decade. http://nsidc.org/data/seaice_
9) Polar bear populations are now four times greater than 50 years ago, even though they are declared an endangered species.
Polar bear populations rebounded after restrictions on hunting. This has nothing to do with global warming. The loss of their habitat does.
10) Melting floating sea ice causes sea level to decrease, not increase. Try this: Fill a glass with ice then add water to the rim. When the ice melts, the water level in the glass drops!
Try this: Freeze pure water. Put those ice cubes in a glass of salt water. Measure the level of the water. Let the pure ice melt. The level of the water will be higher. Salt does not stay in sea water as it freezes.
http://www.physorg.com/
Next, try this: Put a bowl of salt water in your sink, measure the height of the water. Put ice cubes on a dish rack drainer so that it drains into the bowl of water. Let the ice cubes melt. Watch the water level in the bowl increase. This is what is happening when glaciers and antarctic ice melts. They're on land, not in the sea.
11) If the water level were rising, the angular velocity of the earth would decrease, like a spinning skater who extends her arms. This velocity can be measured precisely and is not changing!
The angular velocity of the Earth HAS decreased: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/
12) Al Gore tells us that arctic ice cores show that heating occurs after CO² increases. In fact the opposite is true. Ice cores clearly show that temperature decreases are followed by CO² increases and this has happened for hundreds of thousands of years, even without SUVs and
smoke stacks.
This is untrue.
http://maps.grida.no/go/
13) Historically, whenever we have a sunspot low we also have a lower temperature. The Little Ice Age in 1600 coincides with a 60 year sunspot low called the Maunder Minimum.
14) The cooling scare in the 1970s, reported by the media as the Coming ice age,” came during a sunspot dip.
There was no cooling scare. There was a single paper about a possibility of cooling, the media (and recent head-in-the-sand deniers) took up the rest. The greenhouse gas problem has been known since at least 1859.
http://www.aip.org/history/
Sunspot activity is on an ~11 year cycle. We do not see a 11 year cycle in the warming and cooling of the Earth. We see an exponential trend toward higher temperatures. We're in the middle of another solar minimum right now, during which we've experienced the highest globally averaged temperatures on historical record.
15) Sunspots set up an ionized layer around the planet which blocks
incoming cosmic radiation.
Umm... Not really. Increased sunspot activity is also often accompanied by increases in outflow of matter from the sun (an increase in the solar wind). Charged particles in the solar wind
affect the upper atmosphere (the ionosphere) and mess up communications. Sometimes, the atmosphere is warmed by these interactions and becomes slightly larger, which also affects communications satellites.
16) Cosmic rays cause cloud formation which in turn cools the earth. So, few sunspots — cooler earth. More sunspots — warmer earth.
There is no correlation between cosmic ray activity and cloud formation. There is no evidence that cosmic ray activity has decreased over the last few decades.
http://www.agu.org/pubs/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/
17) We are in an historic sunspot low. That’s why winters are colder
and longer.
Winters are NOT longer, nor are they colder. http://data.giss.nasa.gov/
Go to the Seasonal Mean Temperature Change most of the way down the page.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/
The same trend seen in global average temperatures is seen in winter temperatures. Temperatures are increasing.
18) If sunspot cycle 24 does not start soon in earnest, blow more insulation in your attics! It is also clear that in periods of high sunspot activity, the climate is warmer.
Except the trend for higher temperatures matches a trend for LOWER sunspot activity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
I find it interesting that they started this with denying that there is any warming. Then they moved to arguing that CO2 can't be the cause for the warming we see, then they started arguing that the warming we do see is natural, then they began making up stuff. And they end with conspiracy theories.
Anthropogenic climate change is real. It's happening now, and if we don't stop it, it's going to cause some serious problems for our children and their children.
The rest is just scare tactics. "They're going to eat your babies and
euthanize your grandmother. And also take away your Lincoln
Navigator."
One more thing, though. Stopping the emission of greenhouse gases is actually pretty darn cheap. Especially if you consider the easiest thing to do is not use as much energy.
http://www.epa.gov/
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.
http://blogs.edf.org/
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/
http://www.atypon-link.com/
http://cboblog.cbo.gov/?p=361
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/
http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.
Global warming: Analyze the facts
By GUNNAR C. CARLSON JR.
Colonel, U.S. Army, Retired
With all the debate about Global Warming and Cap and Trade, I think a close examination of the facts is appropriate and badly needed.
The average temperature of our earth has been unchanged for the last 10 years, and in fact is now trending downward. CO² is only 3.6 percent of the total greenhouse gasses, when water vapor, the largest greenhouse gas is included. Only ..117 percent of this CO² is manmade. This small amount of CO² makes little difference in our global temperature. In fact the earth has only warmed 1/10th of a degree due to CO² since the industrial revolution, and has=2 0warmed only one (1) degree in the last 150 years from all causes.
The primary reason that CO² is ineffective in warming our earth is because the CO² absorption band in the atmosphere is almost saturated, so adding more CO² has little effect. CO² is not a harmful gas to humans, even though it has been declared a pollutant. It is a vital fertilizer to plant life. To be harmful to humans the concentration would need to be 6,000 parts per million. We are at 380 PPM at present. The average CO² concentration in submarines is 4,000 PPM and this does not make the submariners sick.
Remember that greenhouse gasses act by absorbing heat, then reradiating it back to earth. The greenhouse alarmists have developed a computer model that predicts, due to the action of gasses, there will be a “hot spot” in the atmosphere at a height of 12 kilometers. Actual balloon measurements show no such “hot spot.” This and other alarmist models have proven to be wrong and erratic. If we can’t predict next week’s weather, how=2 0can we predict the climate years in the future?
Polar ice melts and refreezes on a regular cycle with the low point occurring in September in the Northern Hemisphere and March in the Southern Hemisphere. All the melting reported by alarmists in the Northern Hemisphere in September will be restored in March, year after year! Polar bear populations are now four times greater than 50 years ago, even though they are declared an endangered species.
Melting floating sea ice causes sea level to decrease, not increase. Try this: Fill a glass with ice then add water to the rim. When the ice melts, the water level in the glass drops! If the water level were rising, the angular velocity of the earth would decrease, like a spinning skater who extends her arms. This velocity can be measured precisely and is not changing!
Al Gore tells us that arctic ice cores show that heating occurs after CO² increases. In fact the opposite is true. Ice cores clearly show that temperature decreases are followed by CO² increases and this has happened for hundreds of thousands of years, even without SUVs and smoke stacks.
Historically, whenever we have a sunspot low we also have a lower temperature. The Little Ice Age in 1600 coincides with a 60 year sunspot low called the Maunder Minimum. The cooling scare in the 1970s, reported by the media as the “Coming ice age,” came during a sunspot dip. But why?
Sunspots set up an ionized layer around the planet which blocks incoming cosmic radiation. Cosmic rays cause cloud formation which in turn cools the earth. So, few sunspots — cooler earth. More sunspots — warmer earth. We are in an historic sunspot low. That’s why winters are colder and longer. If sunspot cycle 24 does not start soon in earnest, blow more insulation in your attics! It is also clear that in periods of high sunspot activity, the climate is warmer.
31,000 physical scientists have signed a petition denying any manmade effects on our climate. These are people having no government grants or tenure, so they won’t lose their jobs.
Why would anyone want to convince us that we are causing climate change? This is so they can control:
— What you can eat
— What you can smoke
— What kind of car you can drive
— How much you can drive
— The temperature of your home
— What we can manufacture
— Your power sources
— How many cows you can own
— What light bulb you can use
— What appliances you can use
— Your hot water use
— Your air travel
— Your type of house
— Carbon tax
— Carbon credits
All these things amount to billions of dollars in profit. Follow the money!
$79 billion, and billions of hours of labor and effort have been squandered so far in the USA. The Carbon Market cost will be $2-$10 trillion in the near future if “Cap and Trade” becomes law.
This money and=2 0effort could be used for:
— Reducing real pollutants
— Fighting poverty
— Treating aids and malaria
— Providing adequate drinking water and medical treatment
Public policy which attempts to correct this nonexistent problem could literally cause millions of people to di e.
Considering all of the above, it is clear that climate is changed by nature and not man.
Posts
2 comments:
That was really interesting. Thanks for posting. I haven't yet seen An Inconvenient truth; would you recommend that as a truthful documentary?
There are several problems with An Inconvenient Truth.
1) Al Gore (he's a lightning rod for criticism, so he instantly causes controversy where there shouldn't be any)
2) It's a personal story that's supposed to get people interested in solutions. That's not necessarily bad, but it's Al Gore's personal story, which means everybody who dislikes him will decide not to believe anything he says, regardless of the strength of the argument.
The science is right and accurate (although already outdated). It's worth seeing, but Cosmos is better (but not specifically about climate change).
So, if you can handle Al Gore, An Inconvenient Truth is definitely worth seeing. If he just makes you angry, then you either need to go see it anyway, realizing he's just a figurehead, or you should see something different.
Post a Comment