All this scoffing at climate change deniers or whatever they are called motivated me take another look at the climate issue. The argument is fierce. “Me thinks he doth protest too much,” wrote William Shakespeare. And in this debate, exactly who is protesting too much?
The personal putdowns and attacks are harsh at the people who contradict the mainstream thought. The mainstream believes we are dealing with increasingly high temperature because of increased carbon dioxide (CO2) gases. And the smaller, vilified opposition believes that C02 is a minority gas, and that the world’s temperature is not increasing but cooling.
The almost universal agreement across many sectors that the carbon tax is the answer makes me nervous. Is this a sign that something, politically motivated, is happening? The way mainstream sketches skeptics including scientists turns this whole debate away from science into some other realm.
There are three main problems that I have centralized on the climate argument:
1) One is that that graphs used to indicate the warmest ever are truncated temperature graphs based on averages of climate models, from the year 1979 and onwards. Note, I said climate models, so not actually based on actual temperatures. A couple things wrong in this first point alone. According to Darrell Huff in How to Lie with Statistics, truncated line or bar graphs are not to be trusted. Where is all that historical weather data. I know it exists prior to 1979 as the weather person always gives the highest and lowest temperature, some years go way back before the 1900s. In fact, Environment Canada proudly pegs the highest and lowest, just plug in your city and scroll down.
Which begs the question: why do “they” start with the year 1979 which they say proves, with their truncated graph, that there is global warming? What happens to the temperature chart when you include early temperatures? What about in Europe where they have been gathering temperature data before the late 1800s? What does European temperature trends picture when all years are plotted? The temperature graphs from surface (HadCrut) and satellite (UAH) data actually show a cooling.
2) Should water vapour be considered in the climate change? The global warming people say it is irrelevant. And the global cooling people say it is a major factor. Since our bodies are predominately water, 62%, and the earth’s surface is comprised of 70% water, I believe water vapour has to be a factor. But the question is whether it is measured as one of earth’s atmospheric gases. Perhaps measuring water vapour is too complex, making it difficult to measure. How are evaporation, and wind measured and calculated into the global warming/cooling theory? If all these factors are unmeasured and existing historical temperatures ignored, then mainstream proponents for global warming are preparing us for the wrong future, one that is not a possibility.
3) What about this Canadian carbon tax that is being implemented in every province except Saskatchewan? Where is all this money going? From reading various articles, every province appears to have the money going into their General Account which means the money can be used for anything. In all likelihood, the new taxed income would not be used to lower carbon levels at all, but for other things the individual governments need, to use as they see fit. Once you follow the money, it becomes clear the end result has nothing to do with carbon, and everything to do with adding to government coffers.
Too many elements and factors about our climate are unanswered. Our world is vast with so many variables. Weather stations are rare on the oceans and in many parts of the world. Data from ice cores taken from Greenland are just starting to be extrapolated. But analysis points to a warmer time period thousands of years ago, to higher C02 thousands of years ago. In fact, once you look at the Medieval Warm Period and the Little Ice Age, this carbon worry is extraneous.
This may have just started answering some of the questions that you felt you just couldn’t answer before. If you are looking for more answers, I would suggest Dr. Tim Ball’s book for laypeople called
Dr. Tim Hall is a Canadian climate scientist, originally from Manitoba. After receiving his PhD in Historical Climatology from the University of London, England, Ball ended up teaching at the University of Winnipeg. His website includes other books, and articles.
©Gayle Knutson CanadianBookClubs.com April 13, 2018