Dedicated to the balanced discussion of global warming
carbon offset / trading greenhouse kyoto climate model Inconvenient Truth bio fuel ipcc Glacier

Antarctica, Is It Really In Danger?

GUEST ARTICLE:

By Julee Mitchelsin

With all of the fervor these days about the dangers of global warming many people are concerned about the fate of Antarctica. The fears are that the ice that makes up the continent is melting faster than normal and not freezing back as it usually does with a very even ebb and flow. The concerns are that this will eventually raise the sea level enough to put major cities and land masses under water and leave millions of people homeless and/or even dead.

The New Climate Change Debate

GUEST ARTICLE: 

By Calvin Leonard

Climate Change and Global Warming are indeed a huge debate topic in all its controversy and media hysteria. The majority of people are up in arms over the thought of global warming and indeed they want the United States to sign the Kyoto Treaty and agree to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases.

We cannot say for sure how much the globe may be warming up though, how much is due to human activities versus natural activities, or whether these movements in global temperature would be mostly good or mostly bad for the majority of us.

Scientists doubt climate change

The Washington Times – December 21, 2007

This story has been floating around the media for some time and I suppose it is time that I discuss it as well. It wouldn’t be such a big deal except that Mr. Al Gore, former Vice President of the United States and Nobel prize winner, declared the debate over and that there was a consensus among scientists. Of course, the first thing that happens with that kind of grandiose statement is the nay-sayers raise their hands REAL HIGH!

That is part of what makes this discussion so interesting (and so frustrating). Seemingly intelligent people with such strong and diverse opinions that are arguing so strenuously. As with most bi-polar discussions, the truth likely lies somewhere in the middle.

Study: Climate change could cost economy billions

Jacksonville Business Journal – December 14, 2007

There has been a great deal of analysis on the costs of curbing emissions to the US economy but very little in analysis on a local scale of the costs of the change in climate if global warming continues. This study allows for causation to be a mixture of natural and human and doesn’t allocate responsibility to either side.

There are a few things in the article that don’t appear to be substantiated.

  • pointing to Ponte Vedra Beach as an indicator of the bad things to come for Florida seems like a red herring. Does the study really think any changes at that particular beach are due to the changes in the climate to date? Ocean levels have not increased that dramatically compared to 2 or 3 decades ago
  • there is quite a bit of counter-proof regarding increased hurricane activity. I have written on this several times.

New Study Increases Concerns About Climate Model Reliability

ScienceDaily – December 12, 2007

If you read this site on a regular basis, this will be no surprise to you. A couple fairly prominent and outspoken scientists are trying to explain that the computer models that are used for predicting the massive problems of the future are not quite as accurate and foretelling as some will have you believe.

Many people will say that the climate projections are good enough and we should go into massive retooling of the worlds economy based on this small amount of information. This is the common theme over at RealClimate. While the jury is still out, in my opinion, as to what the future holds for us, there is no question that we do not have very good evidence on either side of the issue. The current models make numerous assumptions and any errors in the logic will tend to exaggerate over time.

My Nobel Moment

Wall Street Journal – November 1, 2007

This is a very interesting commentary from John Christy, a member of the IPCC and, thus, a partial receiver of the Nobel Peace Prize. In short, it appears that Mr. Christy doesn’t think that he deserves his .001% of the prize.

I was pointed to this commentary by two regular readers (thank you to Scott and to Ron – check out their sites by clicking on their names).

35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore’s movie – Part 5 of 5

This is the fifth and final installment of a 5 part series reviewing the comments of the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) in regards to “An Inconvenient Truth” (AIT). I have already covered the 35 points in previous points so this one is strictly my thoughts and comments.

You can read Part 1 of 5 here.
You can read Part 2 of 5 here.
You can read Part 3 of 5 here.
You can read Part 4 of 5 here.

So how did SPPI fair? Personally, I wish they would have been a bit more conservative in their claims. Several times they dinged Mr. Gore twice (or three times) for the same basic error. I tend to write this off as being over-zealous and perhaps trying to get a bigger number for the headline.

35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore’s movie – Part 4 of 5

This is the fourth of a 5 part series reviewing the comments of the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) in regards to “An Inconvenient Truth” (AIT).

You can read Part 1 of 5 here.
You can read Part 2 of 5 here.
You can read Part 3 of 5 here.
You can read Part 5 of 5 here.

ERROR 27 – Shame on Mr. Gore for citing this example! He is trying to link malaria with global warming. There were many malaria outbreaks in Nairobi prior to human induced global warming could be a factor. Mr. Gore’s statements here are pure sham and is probably the biggest reason that I dislike this film as a documentary.

35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore’s movie – Part 3 of 5

This is the third of a 5 part series reviewing the comments of the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) in regards to “An Inconvenient Truth” (AIT).

You can read Part 1 of 5 here.
You can read Part 2 of 5 here.
You can read Part 4 of 5 here.
You can read Part 5 of 5 here.

ERROR 18 – I can’t find evidence for SPPI’s statement that the Arctic has increased decreased in temperature 1 deg C in the last 60 years. SPPI falls victim here to the common Gore affliction of pointing out individual instances of information (ice bound ships) and assuming that this is conclusive data. I have called AIT out on this and I need to do the same with SPPI. Unless they can point to a reference for the temperature increase, I need to call this one spin.

35 Inconvenient Truths: The errors in Al Gore’s movie – Part 2 of 5

This is the second of a 5 part series reviewing the comments of the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) in regards to “An Inconvenient Truth” (AIT).

You can read Part 1 of 5 here.
You can read Part 3 of 5 here.
You can read Part 4 of 5 here.
You can read Part 5 of 5 here.

ERROR 10 – Actually, SPPI isn’t tough enough on AIT on this one. Mr. Gore says that 350ppm of CO2 is all that keeps a mile of ice off of the top of Cleveland, Detroit, and New York. The last time that happened was 2 million years ago during the Pleistocene era and Mr. Gore’s data doesn’t extend that far back so therefore he is making an unsubstantiated claim.