August 18, 2009
POWER TO THE PEOPLE
Letters to the Editor and other People Speak
FROM- Hernando Today
Global warming theory flawed
I've been following with interest the exchange between Messrs. Dunlap and Cannariato on the subject of global warming and would like to add a few thoughts of my own.
First, Mr. Dunlap attributed the rise in CO2 that has accompanied rises in global temperature to the rotting of vegetation exposed by retreating glaciers. However, the primary byproduct of floral decomposition is methane. CO2 is a minor byproduct. The production of methane is why there's a growing interest in "biogas" as an alternative energy source. In fact, the CO2 increases evident in ice core samples are due primarily to the release of dissolved gases from warming oceans. The Earth is about 80 percent covered by water and that volume of water holds an immense amount of dissolved gases in suspension. The cooler the water, the more gas it can trap. Warm the water and the gas escapes into the atmosphere. If Mr. Dunlap has that beer with Mr. Cannariato he can see this phenomenon for himself as the bubbles of CO2 rise to the surface.
In any case, the important fact is that the historic increases in CO2 levels followed the rise in global temperature by about 800 years. It takes a long time to warm an ocean. This is in direct contradiction to the theory that increasing CO2 levels precede rises in temperature. The cause and effect that we're being asked to believe just doesn't exist based on the geologic record.
Second, what's been observed during the past decade or so also has called into question the cause and effect of atmospheric CO2 and global temperature. In science when you put forth a theory to explain a phenomenon, you test it rigorously to see if you're right. The test results must be predictable and reproducible. If they are not, then there are other factors involved that are not being considered and/or cannot be controlled. The global warming theory in vogue is that as CO2 levels rise the temperature will also rise, and vice versa. However, during the past decade, a period which has seen an enormous ramping-up of both China's and India's industrial base and an accompanying increase in manmade CO2 being released into the atmosphere, global temperatures have not continued to rise as predicted. Science doesn't work that way. If the theory cannot predict the outcome, then the theory is flawed.
Third, for Mr. Dunlap to suggest with any degree of certainty that a warming Earth will directly result in a hotter, dryer Midwest and a loss of America's "breadbasket" is nothing more than a scare tactic. It's impossible to predict, even at the global level, what sorts of climate changes might result from atmospheric warming much less be specific as to how they might manifest themselves in any one region.
Finally, I suggest that the IPCC is a poor place to look for scientific truth. The papers produced by this UN panel are driven more by politics and agenda than science. In fact, scientists have asked that their names be removed from the IPCC findings because their work has been so distorted by the panel that they no longer wanted to be associated with it.
John S.V. Weiss