Nov 30, 2009

Proof of Global Warming-Are the Scientists really kidding?

You may have seen press recently that emails from some climate change scientists showing shoddy study to prove global warming were leaked and appeared on numerous blogs of those not sure global warming is either real or caused largely by man.

The Economist in it's November 26th article "Mail-strom" largely backs up the climate change scientists claims by pointing out:

"There is nothing in the e-mails so far to suggest that the authors do not believe in man-made global warming and are making the whole thing up, as some have been claiming. A more serious concern is that they believe in global warming too much, and that their commitment to the cause leads them to tolerate poor scientific practice, to close themselves off from criticism, and to deny reasonable requests for data."

and

"A spate of recent claims of global cooling, for example, rely on comparing 1998, the second-hottest year in the modern record (going to 1880), with 2008, which was relatively cooler. Yet, according to the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, a part of NASA, America’s space agency, 2008 was the ninth-hottest year on record. 2009 is shaping up to be the sixth-hottest. All of the ten hottest years recorded have come since 1997. And retreating Arctic sea ice provides even more visible data to support conclusions of warming."

on the Economist blog some of the responses included the below-one for and one again the situation:

bernardpalmer wrote:
Nov 26th 2009 7:16 GMT

The CO2 ship is badly holed. We are now watching the rats scurry about before they start jumping. It will only take one to jump and the rest will all follow.


MacAfrican wrote:
Nov 26th 2009 8:10 GMT

Here we go again - global warming is a myth and a conspiracy according to the usual suspects.

Why would a few thousand scientists conspire to pretend that the climate is screwed - their 13th cheque doesn't depend on it! Delaying emission taxes certainly pays the bonuses and salaries of an army of lobbyists. Which of the refuseniks actually believe that pumping billions of kg of carbon, NOX's, SOX's etc is harmless? Are the dead coral reefs a conspiracy, are the millions of cubic meter of continental glacier melt a myth?

Reality check : burning a 100W light bulb for a year requires approximately 550 kg of coal. If you think that is sustainable then you really are as dumb as you seem to be on first appearance! Give me one sane reason to support the status quo?

So the debate will continue as the Copenhagen Climate change conference looms within days.

No comments:

Post a Comment