Editorials Climate Change 101: I can see Canada from my California spa!
|
01 January 2010
I can’t really see Canada from here. Even if I could, it wouldn’t demonstrate that I have any special knowledge of Canada. And, I have no special knowledge about climate change either. I offer the anecdotal headline to highlight the causal perceptions we have about climate science; why our individual perspective is important; and why our subjective sentiments can be deceptive.
I was born in Minnesota, lived several years in North Dakota, then back to Minnesota for decades, before a four-year excursion to Canada. By the end of that time, I was very tired of the northern climes, so it was off to southern California. I don’t think my dislike of frozen extremities colored my skepticism about global warming, but I really do enjoy the sunny and occasionally hot days of the Southwest. Nor do I really miss the seasons, beyond my recollection of springtime delight that the worst of winter had come to an end, at least until next year. I suppose I made a personal investment in my preferred climate, but my personal interest in science persisted throughout. I always got high grades in physics and calculus, primarily because of my fascination with the world and trying to understand how it all works.
So, everything was fine for me, climate-wise, until the late 1990s. That’s when climate science became political. Or, at least, that’s when it became obviously political to me. It wasn’t just Al Gore, nor the preaching of environmental extremists, nor even the weather (though it seemed to me that California summers had become decidedly cooler over several years). Politics had always been very important to me; far more important than weather. It bothered me that political hysteria and fear mongering seemed to be treading on the domain of science. OK, I also liked warm climate and hated most politicians.
For several years, I waded through reams of scientific literature and participated in a few internet debates about the evidence for global warming. I had always respected and admired professional scientists; sometimes wished that I’d decided to take that path, rather than a host of other paths I’ve trodden. The array of technical papers and studies that related to climate change was exhausting; the data supporting global warming was impressive. I actually read through an entire IPCC report on the issue. Well, I didn’t read everything. My primary interest was the evidence that attributed causation. That is, were humans (and I) responsible for some abnormal disturbance in the global climate? The multitude of reports simply didn’t persuade me that it was true. There were inconsistencies, illogical conclusions, and a simple lack of reliable data. Even Mr. Spock would have been sorely distressed.
Along the way, I noticed that most other people’s attitudes toward global warming were heavily influenced by their own subjective sentiments and anecdotal perceptions. Some just like things clean; very clean. Not just clean air and clean water, but cleaning the last vestiges of dirt from their bodies and abodes. Oddly, they claimed to love nature, which is very dirty. There were others who wouldn’t know a troposphere from a bathysphere, but they loved polar bears. To them, it didn’t matter much whether the entire earth was cooling or heating, as long as their Teddy Bears were safe and happy. Then, there were those who simply despised capitalism and industry. Any feeble excuse to tear down modern society and get back to the Garden of Eden was not just acceptable, but glorious grounds for a rousing crusade. Almost always, the boring, tentative, and scrupulous efforts of scientists to find little hints about the facts-of-the-matter were just background noise. Dithering didn’t get the job done that those individuals thought needed to be done, whether it was bad weather, clean air, polar bears, or the elimination of greedy capitalists.
Therefore, I can’t deny that I have a viewpoint. I certainly can’t deny that I have my own perspective and sentiments. I don’t begrudge people their own preferences or inclinations. Nevertheless, I have this high-browed, intellectualist, probably deviant craving for the truth. I’ll scrounge and claw around until I think I’ve found it. Then, I try to present the facts, as best I know them, as honestly as I can, in the hope that those others will listen and think. I’m a pessimist, in the sense that I recognize that perspectives and sentiments don’t readily change. But, I’m an optimist in expecting that those other people really do have an interest in knowing what is really true.
Aside from all that, I have to admit that I was genuinely gleeful when I started to see the slope of global warming temperature charts slowly take a downturn. I was amused that the “global warming” hysterics had to make a rhetorical transition to the revised threat of “climate change” as the newest scourge of mankind. And I was relieved that the trek of the climate hysterics to the Mount Olympus of Copenhagen was an abject failure. For the moment, it looks like Mother Nature is teaching a lesson and some politicians are suffering a rude awakening. The climate for sanity is good.
Comments
Seems they got involved in politics not for the common good but for their common good.
An excellent example being the intergovernmental group PNWER alot of their future funding depends on Carbon Taxes and Cap and Trade. This is such a elite group that they are allowed to roam our Northren Continent finding ways to control and takeover our common wealth for themselves. Of course under the guise of their actions are for the common good.
Some of the major items they are taking control of are water, electrical power grids, transportation corridors (aka Gateways), population control (TILMA), pandemics (this file really got messed up over the last few months), Disasters (unclear if their suppose to create or respond), Border Security (EDL, NEXUS, etc)these are just a few of their unelected duties.
The kicker for this group is P3's Public Private Projects, it is used as a shield against taxpayers. For example here in British Columbia we are not allowed to know any details about P3 projects because the private partners information is protected against FOI's. While on the other hand we get the bill for the public part of their private project.
Our Premier has openly admitted the best part of his job is he gets to write the laws.{sic}
Anyhoo getting back on topic Climate Fraud the blinders are on and it's full steam ahead for this group as this is the plan (est.1991) and everything depends on Cap and Trade with Carbon Taxes for the masses.
So in closing along with CRU and IPCC don't forget about PNWER the other group working in North America to screw us good.
RSS feed for comments to this post