Global Warming Roundup

By June 6, 2006Global Warming

Good piece in yesterday’s Denver Post by David Harsanyi on global warming. Says Harsanyi:

“Admittedly, I possess virtually no expertise in science. That puts me in exactly the same position as most dogmatic environmentalists who want to craft public policy around global warming fears.”

Harsanyi goes on to talk about Bill Gray, noted expert on these issues who was profiled in the exhaustive WaPo magazine story of a week ago. He says, “The only inconvenient truth about global warming, contends Colorado State University’s Bill Gray, is that a genuine debate has never actually taken place. Hundreds of scientists, many of them prominent in the field, agree.”

He also notes the work of another Coloradan: “Another highly respected climatologist, Roger Pielke Sr. at the University of Colorado, is also skeptical. Pielke contends there isn’t enough intellectual diversity in the debate. He claims a few vocal individuals are quoted ‘over and over’ again, when in fact there are a variety of opinions.” Pielke, incidentally runs a blog on the topic called “Climate Science.”

…In related news, apparently the College Republicans at Oklahoma University hosted a “global cooling day”, complete with free snow cones. Looks like the Democratic National Committee didn’t find it very funny.

And finally, purely for comic relief is this video, courtesy of the good folks over at CEI, poking some good-natured fun at the hypocrisy of Gore’s jihad and his “Big, Fat Carbon Footprint.”

Join the discussion One Comment

  • play_jurist says:

    There are two ways to deny that the present warming is human.

    1) CO2 levels are higher than they have been in 600,000 years but not because of humans.
    2) Temperatures are not rising primarily because CO2 levels are higher.

    Regarding (1), this is not in doubt. There are multiple corroborating strains of evidence. First, by analyzing the ratios of types of carbon isotopes scientists can determine which molecules came from buringing fossil fuels. Second, there are finitely many places where the increase can come from. The major source would be the oceans and they have observed that has not happened. Really, it is just fundamentally silly to deny that the CO2 that we are dumping into the atmosphere is not responsible for the increase we are finding.

    Regarding (2), first notice the coupling of CO2 and temperature variations in the graph linked here.

    CO2 is a greenhouse gas. More of it enhances the greenhouse effect because it taps heat in the atmosphere, causing temperatures to rise. The idea that the increased CO2 is responsible for the warming is immediately plausible. No alternative explanation has been quantitatively modelled that has successfully predicted the observed increase. Climate models using the initially plausible assumption that the warming is because of anthropogenic factors, especially CO2 and deforestation, have modelled the increase.