Posted on 10/14/2018 7:26:49 AM PDT by Kaslin
There are multiple subjects that currently divide us. If you choose to challenge the conventional wisdom on one of these topics, in any regard, that the Earth is warming (now referred to as Climate Change) you are accused of being a heretic. Some of us believe there is no such thing as settled science thus we are always open to arguments from both sides as to what has occurred in the evolving knowledge. Recently, I was presented with a completely different argument.
Anytime I have written on this I have always referred to climatologists as my source of information. These are qualified experts who not only have a long history of scholarly study in the area, but have the scientific ability to analyze the models presented that predict future world weather. That is why my recent reading of a column really changed my typical way of looking at the issue.
Receiving email from a vast array of sources with a broad political bent keeps me informed of news that a large segment of the population thinks is important. One of the best collections of columns and articles that hits my email box every day comes from Real Clear Politics (RCP). RCP has an excellent distribution of columns that often have a unique perspective or a topic that is fresh to me. I spotted a column that piqued my interest from a person I had never heard of and a publication that was unfamiliar to me. The title was How Do You Tell If the Earths Climate System is Warming?" by Francis Menton.
The crux of the column is that whether the Earth is warming or cooling is based on the time period you are comparing. The Earth over various different periods warmed or cooled and thus Mentons thesis is that you could argue, and often people do, warming or cooling using inherently the same facts, but just a different base period. The thesis is something I found fascinating because of two reasons. First, I had never read what Menton was purporting anywhere else and; second, I have seen conflicting arguments as to whether we are currently in a warming or cooling trend.
Finding that the column was different and somewhat even-handed, I ventured into the orbit of sending it to someone who is a gung-ho global warming person to elicit their opinion. The response A blogger debunking a vast conspiracy of scientists. I'll pass. I replied, It is always this guy does not qualify, that guy does not qualify. but is he wrong? To which I got this This is just more tribalism. The Republicans will automatically disagree with anything that is being supported by the Democrats. Also the vast majority of energy money is flowing to the Republicans. What Republican would ever be on the other side of an issue that the Koch brothers were lavishing money on. Scientific evidence and facts could not be more irrelevant to this debate. I answered, Thank you, but is he wrong? I picked up the column off of a daily summary from Real Clear Politics. They are truly even-handed; I did not know the guys background until after I read the column. Why would you assume he is a Republican? He is a NY lawyer.
I decided to contact Francis Menton. Menton is a semi-retired trial lawyer. He formed his blog, Manhattan Contrarian, six years ago. He told me he not only was a Harvard Law graduate, but his undergraduate degree was from Yale in math. Though he is not a climatologist, this is one smart guy who understands what he reads. He said though he is a little rusty on his math as things have changed since he graduated from Yale, someone with these credentials has the ability to analyze the information into which he delves. This is why he has written about 100 pieces on the environment.
He told me he got interested in the subject because the Climate Change argument was being used by supporters to transform the world economy. He was studying the validity. He found the temperature measurements really only go back to 1880 as noted by NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). He also cited that measurements at that time only covered 5% of the Earth and they were only accurate to 1 degree Fahrenheit.
This still gets down to what are the facts. Whether you buy into the argument that the planet is warming, and it is because of man-made conditions or whether you dont, or you are somewhere in-between, you need to be open to further understanding and additional facts/observations. Just knee-jerk rejection of the arguments on either side because of where they come from or whether they dont agree with your baseline thinking defies scientific thinking.
My biggest problem with the climate change crowd is their argument that this is settled science. Science is never settled and arguing that is about the most unscientific thing ever stated.
If it wasn’t for global warming, Chicago would still be under a mile of ice.
Heh, that’s because those who don’t want debate are the ones to whom “science for poets” was a class that they failed.
What I like to pose to climate change people is: what caused the last ice age and what caused its end?
The global warming isn’t real for the time period claimed, which is the past 125 years.
This article is making excuses for the liberal Luddites claiming the planet is warming due to human activity.
because the Global Warming side has nuffin
If people had accepted Darwins theory he postulated as settled, we wouldnt have attained our modern understanding of nature.
Science can never be settled.
It is supposed to be under a mile of ice now, according to scientists in the 1970s, during the “Coming Ice Age” scare.
Science is not debated. You do your research and publish your results.
A guy told me the other day “Well, the weather (conflated with climate) is changing”.
To which I said, “Geez I hope so. This rain sucks.”
This is one of those subjects that people love to believe because its science fiction. And who doesn’t love a good science fiction story.
Chicago could be under a mile of ice...
ask liberals what caused the last ice age to start and end?
Were gonna die in 10 years if the temperature increases by one degree.
Which supposedly only Big Government can avert.
SETTELED SCIENCE THROUGH THE AGES
- The earth is flat
- The sun and stars rotate around the earth
- Kazillions of little organisms died in the same place kazillions of times and turned themselves into petroleum
- Letting leeches suck blood out of sick people heals them
- Democrats are the party of the working man
This is another fine place for Trump to turn his powerful gaze.
He should set up a world debate on Global Warming. Allow ALL sides to contribute but all date must be open to public scrutiny. Not like Mann’s hockey stick that keeps all its data under lock and key for fear of being outed as fraudulent.
This debate needs to be held while Trump is in office because no one else will allow for fairness.
Most Americans don't have a clue about the impact to their lives if, for example, a carbon tax is implemented.
Climate Science and modeling is not a trivial thing and is way more complicated than we know. Yet, you have scientists who are willing to toss the scientific method out the window probably due to politics.
date=data
The issue is not gloal warming nor climate change.
The issue is man induced climate change resulting in a warming tendency. The issue is that the men are Americans
The real issue is are leftist still Americans? Can Hillary or Nancy or Maxine call themselves American?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.