Saturday, February 03, 2007

Blinded Me With Science

"Global Warming", the Left's version of "Intelligent Design", is in the news this week as the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, or IPCC, is about to release a "definitive" report blaming human activities on increased global temperatures (didn't Napoleon Solo and Illya Kuryakin work for the IPCC?).

The "Global Warming" theory basically boils down (no pun) to this:
  • In the last 100 years, the earth's average temperature has risen by 1.6 degrees F
  • In the last 100 years, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere has risen by about 100 ppm
  • The rise in CO2 is due to increased industrial activities.

    Therefore, industrial activities are the cause of the increased global temperatures.

First of all, what sort of finely tuned, sensitive equipment did they use to measure GLOBAL temperature 100 years ago? I'm picturing giant, mercury filled glass tubes bolted to thick wooden boards. Frankly, I'd expect there to be a 2 degree difference in "measured" global temperature over the last 100 years based on improvements in thermometer technology alone. Same for measured CO2 levels.

Also, 100 years of observations don't really seem that significant when studying a planet that's about 4.5 billion years old (unless the IPCC scientists are Creationists who believe that the Earth is only 6000 years old - hee hee).

But OKAY, let's say it's true -- the temperature IS rising and CO2 levels ARE higher. Regardless of how many color charts the IPCC creates in Powerpoint, it's still ONLY a correlation NOT a proven causality.

That's like saying:

  • The population of middle aged men is increasing (thank you)
  • Sales of red sports cars have gone up
  • Toupee sales have gone up

    THEREFORE, red sports cars CAUSE baldness.

It's NOT the end of the world as we know it (and I feel fine).



I agree with Mr. Maul's general point, but let's just say, hypothetically, that these claims are accurate. I've always wondered why these same "experts" haven't yet created a report showing how such a (purported) increase in global temps would affect agricultural productivity. I submit that an extra two-three weeks of summer in the US Midwest would have a very positive affect. Could such an improvement help relieve global hunger?

GCCR said...

You mean to feed the 14 billion people that Paul Ehrlich predicted would be on the planet by the year 2000?

Anonymous said...

Thank you, Mr. Maul. After an "Inconvenient Truth" and the IPCC reports and the History Channel's doomsday shows, I was feeling quite vulnerable. But a little of your insight has cleared the cloud over my head.

Now said...

Sophist logic reigns.
Could it also be applied to Daylight Saving Time? We could use more daylight for the well being of humanity.

GCCR said...

Could daylight saving time be contributing to global warming?