The global-warming skeptic’s position in brief
It’s a busy-busy day today, but I wanted to direct your attention to an article at Forbes by Warren Meyer of Climate Skeptic, which provides an excellent summation of the reasons behind the dissenters’ argument against anthropogenic global warming:
In last weekβs column, I lamented the devolution of the climate debate into dueling ad hominem attacks, which has led in almost a straight line to the incredible totalitarian vision of the 10:10 climate groupβs recent film showing school kids getting blown up for not adhering to the global warming alarmistsβ position.
In writing that column, it struck me that it was not surprising that many average folks may be unfamiliar with the science behind the climate skepticβs position, since it almost never appears anywhere in the press. This week I want to give a necessarily brief summary of the skepticβs case. There is not space here to include all the charts and numbers; for those interested, this video and slide presentation provides much of the analytical backup.
It is important to begin by emphasizing that few skeptics doubt or deny that carbon dioxide (CO2) is a greenhouse gas or that it and other greenhouse gasses (water vapor being the most important) help to warm the surface of the Earth. Further, few skeptics deny that man is probably contributing to higher CO2 levels through his burning of fossil fuels, though remember we are talking about a maximum total change in atmospheric CO2 concentration due to man of about 0.01% over the last 100 years.
What skeptics deny is the catastrophe, the notion that manβs incremental contributions to CO2 levels will create catastrophic warming and wildly adverse climate changes. To understand the skepticβs position requires understanding something about the alarmistsβ case that is seldom discussed in the press: the theory of catastrophic man-made global warming is actually comprised of two separate, linked theories, of which only the first is frequently discussed in the media.
Emphasis added.
Do read the whole thing; I don’t think you’ll find a better introduction.
And maybe pass it along to any alarmists you know, just to bug them.
(Crossposted at Public Secrets)