Tuesday, October 23, 2007

My critic ignores real science on global warming

You can always expect global warming fanatics to attack the character of those who disagree with their environmental religious beliefs; and that’s what someone did who disagreed with my article in The Desert Sun "President Bush flip-flops on global warming". Sadly, this person and others of similar thinking rely on the word of political scientists and not the evidence reported by actual scientists that man is not causing the planet to warm.

Apparently the fact that other “powerhouses” (according to my critic these include NASA, NOAA, EPA, etc.) share the same erroneous views seems to be persuasive to those who choose not to think for themselves. In my article I referred to the Hudson Institute as an organization that studied the literature and reported 500 scientists refuted at least one element of the popular global warming notion. Notice I didn’t say Hudson reported their scientific studies, they reported the studies of others. However, because my critic believes Hudson is conservative and thus cannot be trusted, this fact is conveniently ignored in the diatribe about the Hudson Institute. By the way, I also have 78 articles by reputable scientists that dispute man-made global warming theory I would be happy to share with critics.

My comments about the “hockey stick” graph relied upon by proponents were also rejected; however many others believe as I do and with good reason. Climatologist Michael Mann refused to disclose the algorithm behind his massively influential "hockey stick" graph, which purported to demonstrate a sharp up tick in global temperatures over the past century, and Phil Jones of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia, reportedly turned down one request for information with the remark, "Why should I make the data available to you, when your aim is to try and find something wrong with it?"

"The National Academy of Sciences--the board of scientists established by Congress in 1863 to advise the federal government on scientific matters--compiled a comprehensive report in 2002 entitled, Abrupt Climate Change: Inevitable Surprises. The 244-page report, which contains over 500 references, was written by a team of 59 of the top researchers in climate, and represents the most authoritative source of information about abrupt climate change available. What the scientists found was surprising to many and ignored by advocates of man-made global warming.

Scientists had known from previous ice core and ocean sediment core data that Earth's climate had fluctuated significantly in the past. But what astonished scientists was the rapidity with which these changes occurred. Many of these changes happened in less than 10 years. In at least one case, warming occurred in significantly less than a decade. Most of this doubling in this instance occurred in a single year, and there were no humans around to cause it.

The critic of my article concludes with the remark that I “undercut” my creditability by purportedly misquoting and relying on the Hudson Institute and I am somehow doing a “disservice” to her; however, the reality is that she must undertake “a willful suspension of disbelief" of reality (to quote someone whom she likely admires) to accept the bogus “science” of global warming cultists instead of the hard evidence of true scientists.

No comments: