Global warming

From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Conservative (Talk | contribs) at 01:54, 22 December 2008. It may differ significantly from current revision.

Jump to: navigation, search

Global warming is an increase in average air temperature in the Earth's atmosphere. As far back as temperature records can be reconstructed, periods of global warming and global cooling have alternated; see ice ages and interglacial warming.

In the modern period of global warming, a slight increase of 0.8 °C [1.4 °F] has been measured at weather stations throughout the world, since around 1850, when organized records began to be kept. Since this happens to correlate with increases in carbon dioxide, many have speculated about their possible relationship. Despite this, there is no completely proven model explaining the rise in global temperatures.


For a more detailed treatment, see Global Warming Controversy.

Since 1989, advocates have clashed on the issue of whether human beings are more responsible than nature for modern periods of global warming; see "greenhouse warming" and global warming theory.[1]

Most non-scientific support for the global warming theory rests on popular accounts such as Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth or on reports issued by the UN's IPCC. However, Keston Green of Monash University and Scott Armstrong of the Wharton School wrote that:

  • Because the forecasting processes examined in Chapter 8 overlook scientific evidence on forecasting, the IPCC forecasts of climate change are not scientific. [2]

Former vice-president Al Gore calls it a moral issue, while climate scientist Richard Lindzen says, "It is probably the most immoral thing you could do to restrain energy so that the billions in the earth who don’t have access to electricity won't conveniently get it." [3] However, it is to be noted that many proponents of the theory propose energy conservation only until 'green' energy generation becomes predominant.[Citation Needed]

In the general, the term global warming can be used for any upward trend in the global mean temperature, but it is mostly used to refer to the 1° F warming since 1850.

The two sides are divided on whether this warming is a natural recovery from the Little Ice Age or a man-made environmental phenomenon. There are also debates regarding the potential positive or negative effects of a warming.

Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. are evenly split on the issue. Boston Globe writer Ellen Goodman wrote:

  • Only 23 percent of college-educated Republicans believe the warming is due to humans, while 75 percent of college-educated Democrats believe it. [4]

Controversy and scientific inaccuracies may have contributed to addressing 'Climate Change' in place of using Global Warming. As the northern pole region melts, the southern pole region ice is growing [5]

The Modern Warm Period

Average Earth surface air temperature has risen about 1° F since 1970. [6] How much of this is due to contamination of the temperature record from the urban heat island effect is hard to assess. Efforts are currently underway to detect and remove this bias. Spurious warming trends that might be considered as global warming can occur almost anywhere. [7] Nonetheless, controversy has persisted over the influence of urban warming on reported large-scale surface-air temperature trends. [7]

According to temperature reconstruction made within an Old Earth paradigm, there have been many cycles of naturally-caused global warming and cooling over many millions of years (see climate cycles). Some scientists, including Richard Lindzen of MIT, Sallie Baliunas of Harvard and Fred Singer (independent), say that the recent warming could be part of another natural cycle or random fluctuations in the atmosphere. However, many scientists also think that human activities were most likely the cause of the the planet's recent warming.

False Claims of "Consensus"

Richard Lindzen wrote in 1992,

Indeed, a recent Gallup poll of climate scientists in the American Meteorological Society and in the American Geophysical Union shows that a vast majority doubts that there has been any identifiable man-caused warming to date (49 percent asserted no, 33 percent did not know, 18 percent thought some has occurred; however, among those actively involved in research and publishing frequently in peer-reviewed research journals, none believes that any man-caused global warming has been identified so far). [8]

Oddly enough, even though 82% of US climate scientists refused to support the global warming theory then, liberal activists were already claiming a scientific consensus for anthropogenic global warming. (It's hard to understand how 18 percent credence in any global warming translates into "consensus" support for human-caused global warming.)

The campaign to convince the public (and their elected representatives) that the "science is settled" began in 1988 or 1989.

By the 2008 elections both candidates for the Presidency of the United States were proposing plans to mitigate climate change.

Natural Variability of the Climate System

Evolutionary scientists who believe in global warming think that the Earth has experienced numerous ice ages over two million years, during which global temperatures dropped approximately 6 °C [11 °F] and then returned to normal. The frigid temperatures allowed ice sheets to expand southward, covering much of Asia, Europe, and North America. The cooling associated with ice ages is gradual, while the terminations are relatively rapid. However, even the rapid terminations of ice ages take centuries to millennia.

Natural Climate Change on Other Planets

Since the Viking spacecraft reached Mars in the 1970s until recent readings were taken, the average temperature on Mars has risen 0.6 °C [1.1 °F] just as the average temperature on the earth has risen. Since human industrialization is clearly not to blame for the change on Mars, other causes are being considered. One possibility is that dust storms are changing the albedo of the planet, allowing it to warm, while another possibility is that solar variations from the sun are causing the warming.[9][10]

Recently, it has also been found that similar to the Earth and Mars, Neptune is also undergoing global warming. Measurements taken at the Lowell observatory in Arizona have shown an increase in Neptune's brightness and temperature since 1980 following the same pattern seen on Earth and Mars. The researchers who discovered this warming suggest there may be a correlation between the warming and solar variations.[11]

Pluto has also been found to be undergoing global warming. The overall temperature increase on Pluto has been greater than that on the earth.[12]

On the other hand Uranus has had no net change in temperature since 1977. A rapid increase in temperature reversed itself. The reasons for this are not understood.[13]

Global temperatures change on other plants even when there is no life, something which strongly supports the idea that humans are not necessarily the cause of earth's global warming. Moreover, the temperature on Uranus has fluctuated back and forth. There is no reason that fluctuations cannot occur on earth, too.

Politics of Global Warming

'Global Warming Now World's Most Boring Topic’ [14]

The need to fight "global warming" has become part of the dogma of the liberal conscience. [8]

Clearly, "global warming" is a tempting issue for many very important groups to exploit. ... dealing with the threat of warming fits in with a great variety of preexisting agendas [like] dissatisfaction with industrial society (neopastoralism), ... governmental desires for enhanced revenues (carbon taxes), and bureaucratic desires for enhanced power. [8]

The global average surface temperature warmed about 0.9 °F over the second half of the 20th Century.

Assessments of climate science by the United Nations (see IPCC - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) have claimed that scientists are 90% sure that over 50% of the observed global warming in recent decades is human-caused, and that continued global warming should be expected over at least the next century. Science published a literature search by Naomi Oreskes concluding that "scientific consensus" supports the IPCC reports. [15]

Several prominent scientists have pointed out the politicized science of the UN's assessment methods. The scientific reports are submitted to a panel of representatives appointed by each country in the IPCC. Several scientists whose research demonstrates that climate change is taking place have complained about their work being misrepresented by the U.N.

  • In addition, a number of the participants have testified to the pressures placed on them to emphasize results supportive of the current scenario and to suppress other results. That pressure has frequently been effective, and a survey of participants reveals substantial disagreement with the final report. [8]

Richard Lindzen wrote:

Perhaps more important are the pressures being brought to bear on scientists to get the "right" results. Such pressures are inevitable, given how far out on a limb much of the scientific community has gone. The situation is compounded by the fact that some of the strongest proponents of "global warming" in Congress are also among the major supporters of science (Sen. Gore is notable among those). [8]

Christopher Monckton wrote an article titled Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered.

States that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change studies are flawed. The present analysis suggests the models failure to predict other climatic phenomena arises from defects in its evaluation of radioactive forcing, no-feedbacks climate sensitivity parameter and feedback multiplier. In conclusion, that there may be no "Climate Crisis" and for governments to reduce emissions may be pointless or even harmful. [16] This was published on a forum of the American Physical Society with the following disclaimer "The article has not undergone any scientific peer review" and "the APS disagrees with the articles conclusions" In fact, the APS disagrees with the article without ever reviewing it.

After the successful completion of a lawsuit against his movie 'The Great Global Warming Swindle', filmmaker Martin Durkin statements read [17]

  • “Everywhere you are told that man-made climate change is proved beyond doubt,” “But you are being told lies.”
  • “This is a story of how a theory about climate turned into a political ideology ... it is the story of the distortion of a whole area of science.”
  • “as the frenzy over man-made global warming grows shriller, many senior scientists say the actual scientific basis for the theory is crumbling.”

Geology professor and scientist at the University of Oklahoma, David Deming talks about a biased AP article mentioning global warming "...whether it's continuing that was completely beyond the evidence." [18]

    The mean global temperature, at least as measured by is now the  same as it was in the year 1980.
    In the last couple of years sea level has stopped rising.
    Sea ice globally is also the same as it was in 1980.
    Hurricane and cyclone activity in the northern hemisphere is at a 24-year low.

Also in discussion of the biased AP report, Michael R. Fox, a retired nuclear scientist and chemistry professor from the University of Idaho says, "There is little evidence to believe that man-made carbon dioxide is causing temperature fluctuation. Other factors, including sun spots, solar winds, variations in the solar magnetic field and solar irradiation, could all be affecting temperature changes."

Richard S. Courtney, a U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) expert reviewer and a U.K.-based climate and atmospheric science consultant says "Rubbish! Global warming is not 'accelerating," and "...that anybody who proclaims that 'Global warming is accelerating' is a liar, a fool, or both." [19]

Don J. Easterbrook, Ph.D., emeritus professor of geology at Western Washington University, asked, "What does it take to ignore 10 years of global cooling....? The answer is really quite simple — just follow the money!"

Al Gore's Claims

  • Al Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, "Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame." [20]
  • Gore claims the snow cap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine." [20]\
  • Al Gore is therefore an example of how in such an important debate, deceitful tactics have been used by liberals to make a position seem more solid than it is.

2008 Presidential candidates on climate Change

Bob Barr is the only major 2008 Presidential Candidate who has not adopted wholesale the theory of human-caused global warming.

According to his website,[21] Republican Presidential candidate John McCain will take a more "aggressive approach" to global warming which he has declared as "undeniable and urgent." He was supported in this in June 2008 by Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger who said McCain was the "real deal on the environment".[22].

In his own words, McCain says "the overwhelming majority of scientific opinion in America today, and in the world, is that climate change is real. The fact is that it is real. The fact is that the solution to it is the development of technologies.... and a cap and trade proposal.... the debate is over."[5] Unless McCain believes that Global Warming is entirely or largely man-made, there would be no sense in supporting a cap and trade solution.

Barack Obama believes "that global warming is not just the greatest environmental challenge facing our planet—it is one of our greatest challenges of any kind." During his first 100 days in office, he would enact a giant and far-reaching tax "an economy-wide cap on U.S. carbon emissions that will reduce U.S. emissions by the amount scientists agree is necessary (80%) or $45 Trillion dollars". [23] He comments "Putting a price on carbon is the most important step we can to take to reduce emissions."[24]

Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" Movie Claims

A British court has determined that Al Gore's movie "An Inconvenient Truth" contains at least eleven material falsehoods [25]

Those inaccuracies include the following

  • The film claims that melting snows on Mount Kilimanjaro evidence global warming. The Government's expert was forced to concede that this is not correct.
  • The film suggests that evidence from ice cores proves that rising CO2 causes temperature increases over 650,000 years. The Court found the film misleading: over that period the rises in CO2 lagged behind the temperature rises by 800-2000 years.
  • The film uses emotive images of Hurricane Katrina and suggests that this has been caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that it was "not possible" to attribute one-off events to global warming.
  • The film shows the drying up of Lake Chad and claims that this was caused by global warming. The Government's expert had to accept that this was not the case.
  • The film claims that a study showed that polar bears had drowned due to disappearing arctic ice. It turned out that Mr Gore had misread the study: in fact four polar bears drowned and this was because of a particularly violent storm.
  • The film threatens that global warming could stop the Gulf Stream throwing Europe into an ice age: the Claimant's evidence was that this was a scientific impossibility.
  • The film blames global warming for species losses including coral reef bleaching. The Government could not find any evidence to support this claim.
  • The film suggests that the Greenland ice covering could melt causing sea levels to rise dangerously. The evidence is that Greenland will not melt for millennia.
  • The film suggests that the Antarctic ice covering is melting, the evidence was that it is in fact increasing.
  • The film suggests that sea levels could rise by 7m causing the displacement of millions of people. The evidence is that sea levels are expected to rise by about 40cm over the next hundred years and that there is no such threat of massive migration.
  • The film claims that rising sea levels has caused the evacuation of certain Pacific islands to New Zealand. The Government are unable to substantiate this and the Court observed that this appears to be a false claim.


Roger Revelle

See Also

External Links

Critique of the Hockey Stick Reconstruction


  1. Some people predicted "global warming," which has come to mean extreme greenhouse warming of the atmosphere leading to catastrophic environmental consequences. [1]
  3. line extra materials/Climate change - lindzen interview.doc
  4. [2]
  5. [3],, As arctic ice melts, South Pole ice grows, january 10, 2008
  6. Hansen's group at the Goddard Institute wrote, "Global warming is now 0.6 °C [1.0 °F] in the past three decades and 0.8 °C [1.4 °F] in the past century."
  7. 7.0 7.1
  8. 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4
  16. , Climate Sensitivity Reconsidered, July 2008
  17. UK Broadcaster Scolded for Film on Global Warming CNSNEWS July 22, 2008
  18. Scientists Call AP Report on Global Warming 'Hysteria' Fox News, December 16, 2008
  19. Global Warming’s Last Gasp NewsMax, December 17, 2008
  20. 20.0 20.1,CST-EDT-REF30b.article
  21. John McCain on Global warming.
  22. Schwarzenegger backs McCain on climate Change
  23. World needs $45 trillion energy revolution, June 6, 2008
  24. Leguea of Conservation Voters
  25. [4],, October 9, 2007

Subscript text