I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science - Part 2: Tree Rings In Finland, Mutiny At NASA And More

On February 1, 2012 we put forth a blog post entitled, "I Am A Global Warming Doubter and A Believer In Science." That post can be accessed by clicking:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/i-am-global-warming-doubter-and.html

The first paragraph from that post set up the argument:

One of the favorite slurs of those that ardently believe in global warming is to demean and slander those of us that have our doubts by declaring that heathens like myself must not believe in science. No discussion, no debate, just a gross lumping of us into one uneducated grouping. We must be uneducated slugs if we do not believe what they believe, namely that man made activities are warming the earth's surface which will eventually result in cataclysmic weather and environment disasters.

From that point, the post went on to describe how it really is the believers in man made global warming that are the most anti-science:

• When an EPA employee developed a scientific research paper that cast doubt on the whole global warming theory, EPA upper management suppressed the publication of the paper. A true, pure scientific approach would have involved the publication of the paper for review by other scientists, i.e. peer review, a standard scientific process. By suppressing the research, the EPA suppressed that scientific process.
• Global warming science was thrown into doubt when the emails among scientists from a research organization in England, who supported the theory, were published. The emails showed how these scientists discussed changing some of their data and findings to conform to their theories, the exact opposite of what real scientists and science processes do.
• A similar doubt was also uncovered in internal emails from a New Zealand scientific group,  also supporters of the theory of man made global warming, and who also discussed the potential need to change their data and findings to fit the theory.
• The post reviewed the words and actions of a Nobel scientist who disputed the claims that there was undeniable evidence of man made global warming.
• And most damning, the article reviewed the work done by dozens of scientists at the CERN Institute, home of the Large Hadron Collider in Europe. CERN is affiliated with 8,000 scientists at more than 600 universities in 60 countries and is one of the premier physics scientific communities in the world. Their lab tests showed that global warming, while it may be happening, had little to do with humankind’s activities and was driven mostly by actions on the surface of the sun. However, the administration at CERN sought to suppress these findings, certainly an unscientific approach to the problem.

The details from the above abuses of science in the name of proving man made global warming can be found at the link above.

Today’s post reviews some of the science, trends, and findings related to man made global warming that have occurred since early February and how the solution we proposed back in February still is the best approach, by far, to address the issue. In the process, we will reiterate our findings and conclusions that allowing the Federal government to come into this issue in its typical heavy handed incompetent manner, e.g. a massive cap and trade process, is unnecessary, unwieldy, and unlikely to succeed.

So what has happened since our declaration in February regarding our belief in science but our doubts about man made global warming:

1) A new climate study published in the journal, Nature, this past summer seems to debunk previous claims that temperatures in recent decades are in any way historic:

• The study methodology indicates our climate was much hotter on this planet during Roman times than previously believed:
• Professor Dr. Jan Esper's research at the Institute of Geography at Johannes Gutenberg University used tree-ring density measurements from ancient pine trees native to Finnish Lapland to produce a climate reconstruction reaching back to 138 BC.
• According to the article, his researchers have been able to precisely demonstrate that the long-term trend over the past two millennia has been towards climatic cooling.
• According to Dr. Esper: "We found that previous estimates of historical temperatures during the Roman era and the Middle Ages were too low. Such findings are also significant with regard to climate policy, as they will influence the way today's climate changes are seen in context of historical warm periods."

In simpler terms, as I understand the research, there have been times in our history that the planet was much warmer than now and what was previously believed, warmer temperatures that occurred without the influence of mankind and our industrial society we see today. This proof of warmer temperatures in our history undercuts some of the basic assumptions in the global warming models that have been put forth to prove man made global warming is a unique reality of present times.

Does this study prove conclusively that man made global warming is a myth? Probably not, but it does cast scientific doubt on the theory by using a novel scientific approach and analysis.

2) The latest data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC), as reported in several sources including the website Real Science:

http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2012/09/30/sea-ice-sets-all-time-record-high/

indicate that the Antarctic ice cap has never been larger. If global warming is occurring, and the Antarctic ice cap is many times larger than the Arctic ice cap, why is the southern hemisphere ice cap bigger than ever?

I have no idea, I am not an expert on these things, but it seems a reasonable question to ask and try to answer in light of what the global warming alarmists are trying to tell us.

3) On March 28, 2012, a joint letter signed by 49 former NASA engineers, astronauts, and scientists was sent to upper management personnel at NASA, accusing NASA of short circuiting the scientific process by presupposing certain facts and theories that support the man made global warming theory without a sound basis for doing so:

March 28, 2012

The Honorable Charles Bolden, Jr.,
NASA Administrator, NASA Headquarters
Washington, D.C. 20546-0001

Dear Charlie,

We, the undersigned, respectfully request that NASA and the Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) refrain from including unproven remarks in public releases and websites. We believe the claims by NASA and GISS, that man-made carbon dioxide is having a catastrophic impact on global climate change are not substantiated, especially when considering thousands of years of empirical data. With hundreds of well-known climate scientists and tens of thousands of other scientists publicly declaring their disbelief in the catastrophic forecasts, coming particularly from the GISS leadership, it is clear that the science is NOT settled.

The unbridled advocacy of CO2 being the major cause of climate change is unbecoming of NASA’s history of making an objective assessment of all available scientific data prior to making decisions or public statements.

As former NASA employees, we feel that NASA’s advocacy of an extreme position, prior to a thorough study of the possible overwhelming impact of natural climate drivers is inappropriate. We request that NASA refrain from including unproven and unsupported remarks in its future releases and websites on this subject. At risk is damage to the exemplary reputation of NASA, NASA’s current or former scientists and employees, and even the reputation of science itself.

For additional information regarding the science behind our concern, we recommend that you contact Harrison Schmitt or Walter Cunningham, or others they can recommend to you.

Thank you for considering this request.

Sincerely,

(Attached signatures)

The attached signatures of the 49 people included their years of NASA service and included veterans with over thirty and forty years of service. Now, none of these 49 appeared to be experts in climate studies. However, most of them appear to be experts in scientific methods, methods that they felt were not being properly used or not being used at all to support the man made global warming theory. They are like myself, believers in science but perhaps doubters of the man made global warming theory.

4) Lets get back to the infamous “cap and trade” legislation proposal that fortunately has not been passed. This legislation was supposed to counteract the impact of man made global warming by setting up this massive bureaucracy of energy credits that was supposed to reduce carbon emissions over time.

The proposed legislation was going to be thousands of pages long, one of the sponsors of the legislation, Congressman Henry Waxman, publicly stated that he had not even read the proposed legislation’s text, and much like every other Federal entity, the bureaucracy that was needed to implement the legislation would have been massive, ineffective, and inefficient. All this for a scientific theory that may not even be true, if you believe the science research above and in the previous post.

And it all may have been unnecessary anyway. According to a an article in Slate.com written by Bjorn Lomborg:

• In the past year, United States’ carbon emissions, the assumed culprit in man made global warming, dropped to their lowest level in 20 years.
• The emissions are down 14% from their peak in 2007.
• The main reason for the drop is not due to government intervention in the marketplace with massive legislation, taxes, and bureaucracy but the simple fact that the growth in natural gas development, mostly via fracking, which has resulted in low cost natural gas availability.
• High gas availability has led to lower prices and costs for natural gas which has led utilities to increase the use of cleaner burning gas vs. dirtier burning coal, which is about twice as carbon intensive than gas.
• In total, the U.S. carbon emissions dropped by a whopping 500 megatons a year, about twice the total impact of the infamous Kyoto Protocol on emissions throughout the rest of the world, without any cap and trade laws being passed.

Bravo, scientific technology and know how reducing the carbon footprint AND the cost of energy, what could be better? All without a government bureaucracy to muck things up. And if man made global warming is a reality, this scientific approach will address that need, just in case.

The bottom line is that you can believe in science and scientific research methods and procedures and still be a man made global warming doubter. There is just to much evidence that man made global warming is a myth and overreacting to the claims of its proponents could be a huge waste of time and wealth.

But it could also be true, despite the manipulating of data and research results, adjusting mathematical models to fit the theory and not the science, etc. If it is true, having both sides yell at each other will not resolve anything.

We proposed a solution back in February that would cover all of the bases, be inexpensive relative to cap and trade, and would not matter whether or not man made global warming was a reality since our solution would take that into account. The top line points of our proposal included the following components:

1. The Federal government would impose an additional  tax of $5 per barrel of oil every year for ten years.
2. If everyone knew that the cost of gasoline would be about 50% higher in ten years, most of them would act appropriately and purchase a more fuel efficient vehicle the next time they needed a new car.
3. Those people that did not act rationally and continued to purchase gas guzzlers would have to pay the steep economic price.
4. This economic approach would reduce most people's carbon footprint, a goal of  man made global warming alarmists.
5. This approach would also reduce our dependence on foreign oil sources, a good thing to do even if there is no man made global warming.
6. The twist on this approach is that the Washington political class would never get their hands on this additional tax. The $5 a year additional cost per barrel of gas would be funneled into a Treasury account and used to rebate back to Americans when they file their income taxes.
7. We all know the political class would squander this pot of money, like they squander all other taxes, so giving it back to citizens would protect it and would insert it back into the economy, helping economic growth.
8. Best of all, no legislation that is thousands of pages long and is never read by the politicians that sign off on it comes into play. Hence, no cap and trade bureaucracy.

This approach is simple to understand, is revenue and tax neutral to the bad spenders in D.C., rewards good behavior (i.e. people purchase more gas efficient vehicles), addresses the potential global warming issue by reducing the nation's carbon footprint, reduces our dependence on foreign oil sources, and leverages the entire auto industry to get the desired results. The elegance of such an approach is so much better than the blunt force attempt of cap and trade.

A similar approach would be done with the other carbon culprit, coal. This simple, economic based approach was actually put together by two Republican Congressmen but was squashed by Obama, Reid, and Pelosi when they controlled Congress and the Presidency. Since then, they have done nothing to break the gridlock of those supporting and opposing the man made global warming  thesis.

The full set of details on our plan can be accessed at:

http://loathemygovernment.blogspot.com/2012/02/united-states-of-purple-presidency_09.html

No one knows if man made global warming is a myth or not. But we need to stop yelling at each other since there is plenty of scientific proof and evidence that man made global warming is actually a myth. Stop the yelling and let's work together to find a solution that covers all bases, just in case. 

We invite all readers of this blog to visit our new website, "The United States Of Purple," at:

http://www.unitedstatesofpurple.com/

The United States of Purple is a new grass roots approach to filling the office of President of The United States by focusing on the restoration of freedom in the United States, focusing on problem solving skills and results vs. personal political enrichment, and imposing term limits on all future Federal politicians. No more red states, no more blue states, just one United States Of America under the banner of Purple.

The United States Of Purple's website also provides you the formal opportunity to sign a petition to begin the process of implementing a Constitutional amendment to impose fixed term limits on all Federally elected politicians. Only by turning out the existing political class can we have a chance of addressing and finally resolving the major issues of our times.

Our book, "Love My Country, Loathe My Government - Fifty First Steps To Restoring Our Freedom And Destroying The American Political Class" is now available at www.loathemygovernment.com. It is also available online at Amazon and Barnes and Noble. Please pass our message of freedom onward. Let your friends and family know about our websites and blogs, ask your library to carry the book, and respect freedomfor both yourselves and others everyday.

Please visit the following sites for freedom:

http://www.cato.org/
http://www.robertringer.com/
http://realpolichick.blogspot.com/
http://www.flipcongress2010.com/
http://www.reason.com/
http://www.repealamendment