EnduringSense

“The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.” Plato

  • Daily Quote:

    "Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit."

    Mahatma Gandh

  • Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

    Join 92 other followers

  • Subscribe

Schism Developing Amongst Global Warming Alarmists

Posted by Steve Markowitz on May 14, 2014

There are two major tenants behind the new religion that bows to the altar that global warming has been caused by man.  First, man’s use of carbon-based energy has caused increased atmospheric CO2 levels leading to a greenhouse gas affect causing the warming.  Just as important is the second tenant that man can significantly alter this warming trend and its effects on the atmosphere by reducing consumption of carbon-based fuels.

A major proselytizer for the man-made global warming theory has been the mainstream media with the New York Times being on the top of that pillar.  This week the Times published an article titled Scientists Warn of Rising Oceans from Polar Melt.  While it includes what would be expected in a related alarmist article, it also includes an issue with the potential to create a schism within the global warming alarmist community.

The Times reports that a huge ice sheet in Western Antarctica is starting to fall apart and that this melting is occurring because of man’s use of greenhouse gases.  Should this continue, while the sea rise will “be relatively slow for the rest the 21st century,” its level could increase by more than 10 feet “in coming centuries”.  How scary!  However, it is difficult to understand how a scientific group that has been so wrong at predicting weather trends from year to year could be so sure of a prediction for climatic change 100 years from now.

Okay, so far the Times article will be heralded the believers.  However, a second theme of the article is likely to create consternation.  Specifically, the Times points out that the West Antarctica ice melt and its disintegration is irreversible:

  • This is really happening.  There’s nothing to stop it now.  But you are still limited by the physics of how fast the ice can flow.”  –  Thomas P. Wagner, of NASA who helped oversee research
  • Today we present observational evidence that a large sector of the West Antarctic ice sheet has gone into irreversible retreat.  It has passed the point of no return.”  –  Dr. Rignot, NASA.
  • “If we have indeed lit the fuse on West Antarctica, it’s very hard to imagine putting the fuse out.”  –  Dr. Richard B. Alley, climate scientist at Pennsylvania State University

The problem this conclusion that?  If the man-made problem is irreversible, then what benefit comes from the expensive green energy programs?

When faced with the possibility global warming is irreversible, the zealots come back with the argument that burning less fossil fuels must be beneficial in other ways.  This response might be appropriate if it weren’t for the significant consequences of green energy policies on the Third World.  While Americans and Europeans can afford to pay five times as much for a light-bulb (to benefit the green energy industry), the effects of green energy on world food prices in Third World countries will be significant.  People already die from starvation in some countries.  Raising the price of food by even a few percent is a catastrophe in such countries.

Finally, as with any zealotry, believers in man-made global warming theory offer irrefutable proof of their conclusion.  They point to the many scientists who have concluded that the science is finished.  Hmmmmm ……..  Forget for the moment that some scientists depend on government subsidies for funding, let’s look at their track record.  Didn’t the scientific community at one time confirm that the sun revolved around the earth?  Didn’t they also conclude that the earth was flat?  Didn’t they also conclude that Y2K would be a debacle for the world’s computer systems?  These questions should at least offer pause before we set policies that will alter the economic future of mankind.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: