Once upon a time, I was merely living with my own “gut” feeling that anthropogenic (i.e. caused by humans) climate change (formerly known as “global warming” – until they discovered that the computer models’ predictions didn’t match reality) was probably very much overstated and over-rated.
Knowing that Al Gore isn’t a scientist (nor are most of the “pro-alarmist” media mavens) I paid little attention to the issue. Also knowing that the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) is a child of the UN (an increasingly worthless body if ever there was one), made it relatively easy for me to ignore the gory details.
Don’t get me wrong, I do care about the environment; I dutifully turn off lights and turn down heat in rooms I’m not in – and dutifully separate my recyclables. This may well be offset by the fact that I drive a ’92 Tercel (but it passes AirCare). In the back of my mind, it just didn’t make sense to me that Carbon Dioxide (which is good for plants, trees, grass and all kinds of stuff) could be such a villainous threat to the future of the planet.
So it wasn’t until about seven to ten days BC (Before Climategate) when I stumbled across a response to an article (sorry, didn’t bookmark it) in the National Post pointing to a site called Friends of Science that I began to take the matter somewhat more seriously. What prompted my interest was a page demonstrating the CBC Ombudsman’s appalling responses to complaints about the lack of balance in CBC’s repeated airings of Al Gore’s error-riddled blockbu$ter (which deprecates the meaning of “documentary”).
From there, I began exploring. One of the things that struck me as quite bizarre in some of the blogs I visited was the disrespectful, dismissive and demeaning ad hominem used by many in the (probably defensive?!) alarmist camp. In one of my previous incarnations, I had spent many hours combatting Holocaust denier-drivel in the newsgroup alt.revisionism. The pro-alarmist “debating” tactics were remarkably similar to those of the “revisionist scholars”. So you can well imagine how horrified I was to find myself with feet increasingly firmly planted in the so-called “skeptic” or “denier” camp on this issue! But I digress …
About two weeks AC (After Climategate), a colleague insisted that the alarmists were right … because “thousands of scientists” couldn’t be wrong! But he was open to seeing the other side if I could point him to some “reputable” sites. So, my mouse and I began retracing our steps … and I sent my colleague the following:
Here’s a link to a response to your “thousands of scientists” http://mclean.ch/climate/docs/IPCC_numbers.pdf.
As I see it, the big problem with the theory of anthropogenic climate change (formerly known as global warming), is that the bottom line is an unwavering insistence that CO2 emissions are the major cause – yet there is nothing in the “science” to substantiate this claim. The reality is that climate does change … always has, and always will, and true science is never settled, certainly not without some empirical evidence – which the AGW proponents have definitely not been able to provide via their prized [and proven sloppy and faulty] computer modelling, which by, all accounts I’ve read, they’ve used to make the data fit their theory. And that’s not “science” in my books!
Politics has taken precedence over science with a lot of help from celebrities (who are not scientists) and too many so-called journalists who’ve been remiss in their duty – and I don’t think that’s a good thing!
Much material has been available for sometime – certainly long before Climategate.
Prior to the emergence of the CRU scandal, the frequent resort to the mantra of “the science is settled” made me wonder if perhaps the noble enterprise of science had fallen victim to the post-modernist claptrap that seems to have infected academia in the last 20 years.
In the intervening weeks I’ve learned a lot! Starting with the debunking of the infamous “hockey stick“. and several very under-reported critiques of the IPCC claims and processes; some eye-opening sites well-worth visiting include:
Climate Audit – Site of Steve McIntyre, the bane of alarmists’ existence!
Watts Up With That – “presentation of weather and climate data in a form the public can understand and discuss”
There’s an excellent six part video by MIT prof. of Meteorology Dr. Richard Lindzen (a climate warming realist)
For some heavy-duty science knowledge, you might want to take a look at Climate Change Reconsidered a publication (pricey 800+ page paperback, but also available free as a .pdf download):
The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) is an international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change. Because it is not a government agency, and because its members are not predisposed to believe climate change is caused by human greenhouse gas emissions, NIPCC is able to offer an independent “second opinion” of the evidence reviewed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).
And on a few lighter (and right on the mark) notes … if you haven’t seen/heard “Hide the Decline” it’s a must! And if you enjoy satire, The Secret Life of Climate Researchers is an absolute must read :-)