Matt Jones' Random Acts of Verbiage

Yep, back once again with a post on Global Warming (my most recent posts: A Few Thoughts on Global Warming and AoS: “An Inconvenient Energy Bill”). First I thought I would point you to this ironic story where a polar ice trek meant to draw attention to global warming was called off due to frostbite.

Then there was the cold — quite a bit colder, Atwood said, then Bancroft and Arnesen had expected. One night they measured the temperature inside their tent at 58 degrees below zero, and outside temperatures were exceeding 100 below zero at times, Atwood said.

I suppose the adventure did draw attention… just maybe not the kind they were looking for.

“They were experiencing temperatures that weren’t expected with global warming,” Atwood said. “But one of the things we see with global warming is unpredictability.”

Oh, so global warming will actually bring colder temps… gotcha. And this quote from Ace:

Does empirical evidence fail to support global warming? Ah well, no problem: Because, you see, global warming also has the insidious attribute of being too unpredictable to actually ever be proven via normal scientific processes like prediction and confirmation.

As Jim Geraghty says, “Global warming is now simply what we used to refer to as ‘the weather.’”

Heh.

Another article from Ace points us to a NY Times article about Gore’s use of science, From a Rapt Audience, a Call to Cool the Hype:

Mr. Gore depicted a future in which temperatures soar, ice sheets melt, seas rise, hurricanes batter the coasts and people die en masse. “Unless we act boldly,” he wrote, “our world will undergo a string of terrible catastrophes.”

…

Some backers concede minor inaccuracies but see them as reasonable for a politician. James E. Hansen, an environmental scientist, director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies and a top adviser to Mr. Gore, said, “Al does an exceptionally good job of seeing the forest for the trees,” adding that Mr. Gore often did so “better than scientists.”

Still, Dr. Hansen said, the former vice president’s work may hold “imperfections” and “technical flaws.” He pointed to hurricanes, an icon for Mr. Gore, who highlights the devastation of Hurricane Katrina and cites research suggesting that global warming will cause both storm frequency and deadliness to rise. Yet this past Atlantic season produced fewer hurricanes than forecasters predicted (five versus nine), and none that hit the United States.

…

“Hardly a week goes by,” Dr. Peiser said, “without a new research paper that questions part or even some basics of climate change theory,” including some reports that offer alternatives to human activity for global warming.

Geologists have documented age upon age of climate swings, and some charge Mr. Gore with ignoring such rhythms.

“Nowhere does Mr. Gore tell his audience that all of the phenomena that he describes fall within the natural range of environmental change on our planet,” Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist at James Cook University in Australia, said in a September blog. “Nor does he present any evidence that climate during the 20th century departed discernibly from its historical pattern of constant change.”

In October, Dr. Easterbrook made similar points at the geological society meeting in Philadelphia. He hotly disputed Mr. Gore’s claim that “our civilization has never experienced any environmental shift remotely similar to this” threatened change.

Nonsense, Dr. Easterbrook told the crowded session. He flashed a slide that showed temperature trends for the past 15,000 years. It highlighted 10 large swings, including the medieval warm period. These shifts, he said, were up to “20 times greater than the warming in the past century.”

Getting personal, he mocked Mr. Gore’s assertion that scientists agreed on global warming except those industry had corrupted. “I’ve never been paid a nickel by an oil company,” Dr. Easterbrook told the group. “And I’m not a Republican.”

It is an interesting article that still tries to say that overall Gore did a good job… but admits that he has probably gone too far.

Yet one more Ace post (have I been linking to him too much?) that directs us to Riehl World View’s post Brit Doc: Thatcher Started Global Warming Craze that discusses a British documentary (by Martin Durkin) that aims at debunking global warming.

The original theory was from a fringe scientist and when it surfaced nearly all mainstream scientists found it laughable. Man’s contribution to CO2 in the atmosphere is so small when compared to the contributions from volcanoes, plants and especially the oceans, it’s doubtful man could effect anything, let alone climate, by producing CO2. But Thatcher had a problem and a plan.

The previous government had been brought down by a devastating and violent coal mine strike and another strike came along as she was in office. Being determined to break the cycle of labor, a large part of it being coal miners, reeking such havoc and ultimately dictating terms to the government, she was determined to move the country away from coal as a power source.

Not trusting Middle Eastern oil as a power source that would produce stability , she wanted to move Britain toward nuclear energy in a major way. The strongest selling point was that nuclear energy was clean and she seized upon the CO2 theory, reasoning that if she could increase concern over coal, she’d be able to implement plans to begin building nuclear reactors.

Millions of government dollars were placed on the table at Britain’s National Academy of Science to produce specific science that heightened concerns over CO2 as a serious health and environmental concern. The meme, if you will, and the dollars available to scientists for such work grew, in Britain and across Europe and even in the US. It was the seed of the Global Warming industry we see today.

The Great Global Warming Swindle (the documentary) can be watched at Google Video. Check it out.

Oh such a fun topic.