Greenhouse Gas Skepticism

Seems those who are skeptics that greenhouse gas emissions are the cause of global warming are not remaining silent.

(See here) a Telegraph piece written by Christopher Monckton that questions the science that claims human activity is responsible for climate change.

Christopher makes a powerful argument that some of the statistics and history of world temperatures are being skewed in order to hype the threat of global warming. Christopher also makes a strong case that it is increased solar output that is responsible for global warming.

(See here) a follow on piece that also appeared on the Telegraph web site. The author of this second piece is not identified, but it appears to be Christopher Monckton again.

In this second piece, Christopher apologizes for some errors he made and he attempts to rebut some of the economic figures behind Sir Nicholas Stern's report on the economics of climate change. Sir Nicholas Stern's report came out just prior to the November elections held here in the United States and received considerable publicity from the US media.

Christopher also points out a conclusion that I also had arrived at long ago. Even if the developed world completely eliminates greenhouse gas emissions, nothing will have been accomplished unless the developing world signs on. I myself will take Christopher to task for including Brazil in the list of nations that are not doing enough. From what I have seen, Brazil can be credited with leading the world when it comes to shifting vehicle fuels to renewable energy sources.

One quote I wish to lift from this second piece follows:
On Thursday, Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, compared climate sceptics to advocates of Islamic terror. Neither, she said, should have access to the media.
(Margaret Beckett is Foreign Secretary of Great Britain.)

Have you got that? Margaret thinks that, in Britain anyway, the debate is now over and skeptics should be silenced.

In an earlier post I noted how, at the same time Earth's polar ice caps are shrinking, NASA has discovered the same thing is happening to the polar ice caps on Mars. I guess Margaret will blame this occurrence on mankind as well? Perhaps the two solar powered Mars rovers NASA placed on Mars are responsible?

In a previous post I also noted how scientists believe, and have evidence, that as little as 5,000 years ago, much of the United States Great Plains were dessert. While scientists might not be able to accurately solve why this extreme variation in climate happened, one thing I am sure they can rule out is blaming mankind for it.

Now I am not attempting to trash all the experts who blame global warming on green house gases. At least some of the experts have acknowledged the contributions to global warming that might be due to increased solar output. These experts then often state that while the sun might explain much of the increased temperatures experienced by the Earth, greenhouse gases are still a contributing factor.

Seems to me, that the way forward is still pretty clear. At the same time as the world faces the threat of global warming, we are also facing the problem of "peak oil" production. While attempting to combat greenhouse gases, the world will start the shift to alternative fuel sources which would limit the impact of such a strong reliance on fossil fuels as an energy source when production starts to fall.

Since the banner that will be raised will be screaming "combat global warming" the developed world could even force developing nations to join in on the effort. The developed world could use trade tariffs (placed only to "save the world", not as an unfair trade practice) to penalize any developing nation that failed to follow the developed world's lead in shifting to alternative, renewable energy sources.

Seems to me this will not be wasted effort. Even if the vast majority of global warming is due to increased solar output, history will look back on the efforts made as being wise. Instead of waiting for the constricted availability of fossil fuels to strangle the world economy, we will have forced technological research into alternative fuels today and started the adoption of alternative fuel sources.

Worst case scenario would be that the contributions of greenhouse gases to global warming will be discovered to be nearly complete bullshit however mankind will still be enjoying cleaner air in the future as a result of our efforts.

The problems mankind faces include global warming, peak oil production, and an increasingly polluted environment. Shifting to alternative fuel sources might help solve all three of these problems, and certainly will help solve at least two of them. I am still on board for the massive effort that would be required.

However the debate is still not over. I stand against any who, like Margaret Beckett would attempt to throw a gag on skeptics like Christopher Monckton. If Margaret analyzed what Christopher had to say, she might learn a thing or two.


Post a Comment

<< Home