Man-Made Global Warming: 10 Questions

HUMAN EVENTS ^ | 12/20/2007 | Pat Sajak

[neverdem]

The subject of man-made global warming is almost impossible to discuss without a descent into virulent name-calling (especially on the Internet, where anonymity breeds a special kind of vicious reaction to almost any social or political question), but I’ll try anyway. I consider myself to be relatively well-read on the matter, and I’ve still come down on the skeptical side, because there are aspects of the issue that don’t make a lot of sense to me. Though I confess to have written none-to-reverentially on the subject, I want to try to put all that aside and ask ten serious questions to which I have been unable to find definitive answers:

1. What is the perfect temperature?

If we are to embark on a lifestyle-altering quest to lower the temperature (or at least minimize its rise), what is our goal? I don’t ask this flippantly. Can we demonstrate that one setting on the global thermostat is preferable over another? If so, what is it, and how do we get there? And, once there, how do we maintain it? Will we ever have to “heat things up” again if it drops below that point?

2. Just what is the average temperature of the earth?

At any one time there are temperature extremes all over the planet. How do we come up with an average, and how do those variations fit in with our desire to slow global warming?

3. What factors have led to global warming in the past, and how do we know they aren’t the causes of the current warming trend?

Again, I don’t ask this in a judgmental way. There is no argument that warming cycles (or cooling, for that matter) have been a part of earth’s history. Why are we so sure this one is different?

4. Why is there such a strong effort to stifle discussion and dissent?

I’m always troubled by arguments that begin, “Everybody agrees...” or “Everyone knows...” In fact, there is a good deal of dissent in the scientific world about the theory of man-made global warming. A large (and growing) segment of those who study such things are questioning some of the basic premises of the theory. Why should there be anything wrong with that? Again, this is a big deal, and we should have the best information and opinion from the best minds.

5. Why are there such dramatically different warnings about the effects of man-made global warming?

Predictions of 20-foot rises in ocean levels have given way to talk of a few inches over time. In many cases, those predictions are less than the rises of the past few centuries. Whatever the case, why the scare tactics?

6. Are there potential benefits to global warming?

Again, I don’t ask this mockingly. Would a warmer climate in some areas actually improve living conditions? Would such improvement (health, crop production, lifestyle) balance any negative impact from the phenomenon?

7. Should such drastic changes in public policy be based on a “what if?” proposition?

There are some who say we can’t afford to wait, and, even if there’s some doubt, we should move ahead with altering the way we live. While there are good arguments for changing some of our environmental policies, should they be based on “what it?”

8. What will be the impact on the people of the world if we change the way we live based on man-made global warming concerns?

Nothing happens in a vacuum; there are always unintended consequences to our actions. For example, if we were to dramatically reduce our need for international oil, what happens to the economies of the Middle East and the populations that rely on oil income? There are thousands of other implications, some good and some bad. What are they? Shouldn’t we be thinking about them and talking about them?

9. How will we measure our successes?

Is the measuring stick going to be temperature, sea level, number of annual hurricanes, rainfall, or a combination of all those things? Again, do we have a goal in mind? What happens when we get there?

10. How has this movement gained such momentum?

We’ve faced environmental issues throughout our history, but it’s difficult to remember one which has gained such “status” in such a short time. To a skeptic, there seems to be a religious fervor that makes one wary. A gradual “ramping down” of the dire predictions has not led to a diminution of the doomsday rhetoric. Are these warning signs that the movement has become more of an activist cause than a scientific reality?

Just asking.

Mr. Sajak is the host of "Wheel of Fortune" and PatSajak.com.

Advertise | Privacy Policy | Terms and Conditions
Copyright © 2007 HUMAN EVENTS. All Rights Reserved.

[neverdem]

U.S. Senate Report: Over 400 Prominent Scientists Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007

[Sgt_Schultze]

IPCC Nobel winner calls IPCC report: "Dishonest Political Tampering with the Science..."

[alicewonders]

Good questions!

I thought Pat Sajak was just a game show host - I had no idea he was also an intelligent thinker.

[Lexinom]

The problem with this whole premise is that the sheer number of variables and unknowns is such that, by tweaking any group of them, one can reach the conclusion one wishes. A three-year cooling trend, for example, could be twisted to support the premise of “global warming”.

[DWar]

How do you argue with a man smart enough to go to work everyday with Vanna White?

[Lexinom]

Oh, and forgot: and all the policy decisions that go along with it.

[Wil H]

Never mind 400 dissenters...

There are over 19000 signed up as dissenters at “The Petition Project”!

[grey_whiskers]

Apparently he bought a clue.

Cheers!

...oh, and Merry Christmas.

[PeaceBeWithYou]

Alsa Doom and the Secret of Siotoo

[Hunble]

EXCELLENT!

[REDWOOD99]

11. Why can’t we reverse global warming by turning our air conditioners on, full blast, and leaving our doors open?

[alicewonders]

Thank you, and Merry Christmas to you too!

[Uncle Miltie]

"We’ve faced environmental issues throughout our history, but it’s difficult to remember one which has gained such “status” in such a short time."

1) Overpopulation
2) The Ozone Hole
3) Industrialization (Malthus)
4) Soylent Green
5) DDT
6) Global Cooling

In my lifetime (excepting #3 above), the left has always had the "Mommy Earth needs Socialism" program.

[Syberyenta]

What makes us think people who cannot predict next week’s weather can predict anything else?

[HisKingdomWillAbolishSinDeath]

“The Goracle suddenly falls silent.”

[CodeMasterPhilzar]

I would add a couple of questions:

11) Who benefits from a concerted, global (or at least western-led) effort to reduce mankind's influence on global climate?

It is a fair question. If we are going to make policy decisions and take actions that will lead to dramatic, or even modest changes in lifestyle and living conditions for hundreds of millions of people... I think it fair to know something of the motives and interests of the people advocating these changes. If it will indeed cost the economies of a number of countries trillions of dollars, where will that money (power) go, and who will control it?

12) How certain are we, really, about global climate change? The current situation cries out for a dispassionate, non-partisan look at the state of the art in climate science.

Recently, it appears that "studies" and research funded by pro-environmental groups universally support the man-caused or man-enhanced global warming theory. Meanwhile, studies and research funded by various industry groups tends to find no scientifically sound link or proof of man's influence. When findings so clearly correlate to the advocacy of the sponsor... It calls the entire body of work into suspicion.

We desperately need a thorough, realistic, and humble assessment of our current knowledge-base on climate science. This would include the veracity and accuracy of historical climate data; our current understanding of the interactions of various elements of climate; an honest admission of what we do not know or do not yet fully understand about climate factor interactions; a study of climate modeling techniques, including how well they assimilate historical data to predict current conditions, as well as a sensitivity analysis so that their probability of correctly predicting future climates may be judged.

13) Finally, I would ask, is this effort futile? If the Earth's climate is indeed warming, is it folly to think we can do anything to change it? Do we realistically have the technology and resources to do anything on such a global scale? Do we realistically have the "human power" - the will to make such changes and sacrifices as may be necessary? This requires a serious, honest assessment of human nature. Given that we tend to go to war, kill, and destroy for often the most stupid/simplistic of reasons... Is it realistic to think that we as a species can effectively adopt such altruistic motives?

[Choose Ye This Day]

He’s had quite a few great essays in recent years. A very sharp guy.

[the anti-liberal]

Fred T. speaks for me:

March 22, 2007, 9:30 a.m.

Plutonic Warming

By Fred Thompson

Editor’s note: Click here to listen to the original radio commentary this transcript is based on.

Some people think that our planet is suffering from a fever.  Now scientists are telling us that Mars is experiencing its own planetary warming: Martian warming. It seems scientists have noticed recently that quite a few planets in our solar system seem to be heating up a bit, including Pluto.

NASA says the Martian South Pole’s “ice cap” has been shrinking for three summers in a row. Maybe Mars got its fever from earth. If so, I guess Jupiter’s caught the same cold, because it’s warming up too, like Pluto.

This has led some people, not necessarily scientists, to wonder if Mars and Jupiter, non signatories to the Kyoto Treaty, are actually inhabited by alien SUV-driving industrialists who run their air-conditioning at 60 degrees and refuse to recycle.

Silly, I know, but I wonder what all those planets, dwarf planets and moons in our SOLAR system have in common. Hmmmm. SOLAR system. Hmmmm. Solar? I wonder. Nah, I guess we shouldn’t even be talking about this. The science is absolutely decided. There’s a consensus.

Ask Galileo.

— Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee.

© PAUL HARVEY SHOW, ABC RADIO NETWORKS 

[Choose Ye This Day]

Here are some of his other essays:

http://www.patsajak.com/news_archive.php?view=says

[alicewonders]

Thank you - he’s got a great website - very interesting!