It’s time to talk about global warming — actually, Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).
As you might have surmised, I do not believe that CO2 emissions are causing global warming, and you are entitled to know why I have reached that conclusion.
I have been following the debate for around 15 years and noted three fundamental facts. I think everyone can and should determine the facts for themselves and not rely on the UN or individuals in government to tell them what to think.
What I describe here is what everyone can determine for themselves, from the internet, library, bookstore or elsewhere.
The first fact that led me to reach the conclusion I did, is that temperatures around 1100 AD were higher than they are today, while CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere were 278 ppm, that is, at pre-industrial revolution levels. There were no automobiles; coal-fired power plants; cement mills; steel mills or other CO2 producing industries in 1100 AD – yet temperatures were higher than today.
During this medieval warm period, the Vikings settled Greenland and it flourished for a few hundred years.
Also during this warm period, grapes were grown as far north as Scotland.
Then we entered into a cold period, known as the Little Ice Age. This cold period continued until the early 1800s. CO2 levels remained at pre-industrial revolution levels during this period.
The picture of George Washington crossing the Delaware shows large ice flows in the Delaware River. A part of Washington’s forces were prevented from crossing the river below Trenton because of the ice.
Remember Hans Brinker or the Silver Skates? This book was about ice skating on frozen canals in the Netherlands, a practice that is no longer common as the canals freeze much less frequently.
Interestingly the IPCC tried to prove that the Little Ice Age never existed, but their “Hockey Stick” proof was proven to be bogus.
Besides, people can look these items up for themselves and see that there really was a Little Ice Age.
It was around the mid 1800’s that CO2 levels in the atmosphere started to rise. This coincided with the Industrial Revolution and with temperatures beginning to rise around the world. Rising temperatures while CO2 levels also rose was proof to some people that CO2 emissions were causing the rise in temperatures.
But, the rise in temperatures has not consistently followed the rise of atmospheric CO2 levels.
The world’s temperatures have been more or less constant for the past 10 to 15 years, while CO2 levels in the atmosphere have continued to rise. There is a disconnect between temperatures and rising atmospheric CO2 levels.
If temperatures remain constant while CO2 levels rise, it would suggest there is little linkage between the two.
These are the facts that people can determine for themselves, and with a little more research they will find additional information that refutes the AGW hypothesis. There is, for example, the missing fingerprint where computer models say there should be higher temperatures over the equator with rising CO2 levels, but where, in fact, satellite data show no rise in temperatures over the equater.
Just because temperatures have risen during the last century is no reason to conclude that CO2 emissions have caused the rise.
In addition, there have been too many examples of erroneous information published by the IPCC as well as by our government. When there is a pattern of erroneous information, it’s time to question the entire hypothesis.
I’ll only mention a few to establish that mistakes were made.
- There was the previously mentioned Hockey Stick.
- There was the report that Himalayan glaciers would disappear by 2035, later recanted.
- There was the report that over half the Netherlands were below sea level, also later recanted.
- There are the incorrect temperature readings from temperature stations around the world, but especially in the United States.
- There was the loss of original data at the East Anglia Climate Research Unit. (This was part of what has been termed climate gate.)
The higher temperatures in 1100 AD, the Little Ice Age, the disconnect between steady temperatures and rising CO2 levels, and the many mistakes made by proponents of AGW are a few of the reasons I have concluded that CO2 emissions are not a threat and that energy policies should not be based on the AGW hypothesis.
It’s the last point that needs to be highlighted: Energy policies should not be based on the questionable AGW hypothesis.