Bring in the Judge

from Columbia Daily Tribune


The jury is still out on warming

I have noticed an interesting and consistent media phenomenon: Virtually no airtime or other coverage is given to the idea that maybe, just maybe, global warming is not occurring. Or if it is occurring, it is not mankind’s fault but rather is the result of natural phenomena. It is always presented as accepted fact, axiomatic really, that it is true, it is bad and mankind is largely responsible. Me? I’m not sure.

The global warming issue is complex, but I believe the key questions can be boiled down to these four:

1. Do we live in an era of global warming?

2. If so, is it mostly man-made?

3. If so, should such a moderate temperature increase bother us more than other pressing problems?

4. If we want to change the climate, can it be done? And would our efforts be the best allocation of our always scarce resources?

Let’s get to those questions.

As to question No. 1:

The global warming theory is that manmade carbon dioxide emissions gradually build up in the atmosphere. They trap heat from the sun as in a greenhouse, which drives temperatures to catastrophic levels. We do this by burning fossil fuels like coal and oil. It’s a plausible theory, but is it true?

More and more scientists and academics are lining up to point out fluctuations in global temperatures for several thousand years correlate much more consistently with patterns of radiation from the sun than any rise in CO2 levels. These folks are concerned that after a century of high solar activity in the form of sunspots and flares, the radiation level is weakening, which in fact predicts a likely drop in temperatures. A report by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC) says that, contrary to what we hear in the media, the temperatures have not risen over the past decade, even though carbon dioxide levels have been increasing. In fact, temperatures have fallen half a degree in the past 10 years. Because we are experiencing a period of reduced sunspot and other solar activity, many scientists worry we are trending to another Little Ice Age.

And what about that vaunted “scientific consensus” with respect to global warming? More and more scientists express doubts about whether global warming is occurring. In addition, science does not work by “consensus,” as Galileo and Einstein demonstrated by shattering the scientific consensus of their day.

Solar physicist Pat Brekke, a senior adviser to the Norwegian Space Centre in Oslo, has published more than 40 peer-reviewed scientific articles on the sun and solar interaction with the Earth and has served as a referee for scientific journals. Brekke, who was the deputy project scientist for the international Solar and Heliospheric Observatory and has a new book about the sun titled “SolarMax,” rejected claims of a consensus on global warming. “Anyone who claims that the debate is over and the conclusions are firm has a fundamentally unscientific approach to one of the most momentous issues of our time,” Brekke said on March 2, 2008. “We could find the temperature leveling off or actually falling in the course of a 50-year period,” Brekke said. “There is much evidence that the sun’s high-activity cycle is leveling off or abating. If it is true that the sun’s activity is of great significance in determining the Earth’s climate, this reduced solar activity could work in the opposite direction to climate change caused by humans.”

So put me down as decidedly agnostic on global warming. Like more and more scientists, I believe cooling is as likely to be occurring. So does our old friend the Farmer’s Almanac, which has a good track record. A geologist named David Gee, recently chairman of the Science Committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress, said it best: “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?”

As to question No. 2, is

global warming mostly man-made?

History shows us the Roman Warming period (200 B.C.-600 A.D.) was followed by a major cooling period in the Dark Ages (600-900 A.D.). From 900 to 1300 A.D. was the Medieval Warming period, which was likewise followed by the so-called Little Ice Age from 1300 A.D. to 1850 A.D. It warmed up again from 1910 to 1940 and then cooled from 1940 to the late 1970s. Though it warmed a bit after that, it has been cooling again for the past 10 years. Many of these warming periods occurred without detectable increases in CO2 levels. The Vikings were farming in Greenland — and it’s no accident it is called Greenland — in 1100 A.D. And, of course, there were no automobiles or power plants then.


The industrial revolution began about 200 years ago. There is no question that CO2 levels are up at least 35 percent over that period. Does that mean burning more fossil fuels — which creates more CO2 — is creating global warming, as so many people claim?

Well, probably not.

After all, during a good part of the past 200 years the climate was cooling but CO2 levels were rising. For example, the six-fold increase in hydro-carbon use since 1940 has had no noticeable effect on the atmospheric temperature. During the first four decades after 1940, when average CO2 levels were steadily increasing, U.S. average temperatures were in fact falling. It thus seems to me that, to date, human beings are not a significant cause of climate change. And if that is the case, one has to wonder how effective we can be in altering or stopping climate change.

Recently a group of scientists known as the Science and Environmental Policy Project issued a report titled “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate.” Note this quote: “Less than half of the CO2 emitted by fossil fuel burning remains in the atmosphere; the rest is absorbed by the terrestrial biosphere. ...” And this was after noting mankind accounts for only 3 percent of CO2 emissions on Earth each year.

Polling of climate scientists indicates about 30 percent are skeptical of the idea mankind is responsible for global warming. At least 31,000 scientists, including

some Nobel laureates, recently signed a manifesto called the Oregon Petition, which expresses doubt about man’s role in global warming.

Whether increases in the Earth’s temperature are attributable to mankind is questionable.

In two weeks: A discussion of questions 3 and 4.