Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

Great informative article by Canadian climatologist Dr. Tim Ball.

Excerpts follow. Read the whole article at Canada Free Press.

This is what happens when good science goes bad. It’s the same story with orthodox evolution theory.

This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science.

“It is a cold fact: the Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species,” wrote Lowell Ponte in 1976.

Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970’s global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990’s temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I’ll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling.

Sadly, my experience is that universities are the most dogmatic and oppressive places in our society. This becomes progressively worse as they receive more and more funding from governments that demand a particular viewpoint.

I am not alone in this journey against the prevalent myth. Several well-known names have also raised their voices.Michael Crichton, the scientist, writer and filmmaker is one of them. In his latest book, “State of Fear” he takes time to explain, often in surprising detail, the flawed science behind Global Warming and other imagined environmental crises.

Another cry in the wildenerness is Richard Lindzen’s. He is an atmospheric physicist and a professor of meteorology at MIT, renowned for his research in dynamic meteorology – especially atmospheric waves. He is also a member of the National Academy of Sciences and has held positions at the University of Chicago, Harvard University and MIT. Linzen frequently speaks out against the notion that significant Global Warming is caused by humans. Yet nobody seems to listen.

Until you have challenged the prevailing wisdom you have no idea how nasty people can be. Until you have re-examined any issue in an attempt to find out all the information, you cannot know how much misinformation exists in the supposed age of information.

Comments
Thank you bFast. I too loathe the "credential" card.Atom
February 6, 2007
February
02
Feb
6
06
2007
09:02 AM
9
09
02
AM
PDT
This post frustrates me. The debate between global warming and evolution seem to be significantly parallel. What frustrates me is the argument from authority -- I have such and such a degree from such and such an institiution, I have such and such qualifications, these other guys agree with me and they have their credentials. As with the question of evolution, I would prefer to see actual data, actual evidence.bFast
February 6, 2007
February
02
Feb
6
06
2007
08:59 AM
8
08
59
AM
PDT
Global cooling is a lot easier to do than global warming. See Nuclear Winter. Just blow the Gobi Desert (or as much as you need) up into the stratosphere. The dust & ash blocks the sun et viola! Global cooling. Now some people will protest, "But Dave, won't that cause horrible radioactive fallout?" Well, yeah, but the horribleness is confined to the rate of cancer increasing. So we better get busy finding a cure for cancer because that's the key to an easy, painless solution to global warming - if global warming even becomes a real problem. So instead of spending trillions fighting global warming we should spend trillions curing cancer. And if global warming doesn't become a problem then we still get a cure for cancer to show for our money. That's a win-win situation!DaveScot
February 6, 2007
February
02
Feb
6
06
2007
08:23 AM
8
08
23
AM
PDT
I found it ironic that right after reading Dave's post, I found this in my junk e-mail box:
Global Warming: why it is the Left's last best chance to gain a stranglehold on our political system and economy... and how we can fight back For decades, environmentalism has been the Left's best excuse for increasing government control over our actions in ways both large and small. It's for Mother Earth! It's for the children! It's for the whales! But until now, the doomsday-scenario environmental scares they've trumped up haven't been large enough to give the sinister prize they want most of all: total control of American politics, economic activity, and even individual behavior. With global warming, however, greenhouse gasbags can argue that auto emissions in Ohio threaten people in Paris, and that only global government can tackle such problems. National sovereignty? Democracy? Forget it: global warming has now brought the Left closer to global government, statism, and the eradication of individual rights than it has ever been before. Now, in The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism, Christopher C. Horner tears the cover off the Left's manipulation of environmental issues for political purposes -- and lays out incontrovertible evidence for the fact that catastrophic man-made global warming is just more Chicken-Little hysteria, not actual science. He explains why, although Al Gore and his cronies among the media elites and UN globalists endlessly bleat that "global warming" is an unprecedented global crisis, they really think of it as a dream come true. Global warming is the ideal scare campaign for those who are doing all they can to secure strict control over society, business, and the minutest details of individual life. For, as Horner explains, if global warming really were as bad as the Leftist doomsayers insist it is, then no policy imaginable could "solve" it. According to the logic of the greens' own numbers, no matter how much we sacrifice there would still be more to do. That makes global warming the bottomless well of excuses for the relentless growth of Big Government. Horner details how today's environmentalists use strong-arm legal tactics -- and worse -- against those who dare to point out the weakness of their arguments for global warming. Along the way, he explodes ten top global warming myths, carefully examines the evidence to determine how much warming there really is and what is actually causing it. It's time to stand up to the environmentalist industry and insist: human beings are not the enemy. In breezy, light-hearted and always entertaining fashion, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism gives you the facts you need to do so.
I really don't know anything about this book or its author, so I neither endorse nor condemn it. However, there does seem to be some merit in the argument that if global warming really were a man made problem, then we are already beyond the point where simply changing behavior can "solve" the issue. If it isn't a man-made problem, then what difference will changing our behavior make? Given the way Darwin defenders go about defending evolution, why should we expect the science of global warming to be any different. The wise course seems to be to take the role of skeptic.DonaldM
February 6, 2007
February
02
Feb
6
06
2007
07:57 AM
7
07
57
AM
PDT
1 2 3

Leave a Reply