Al Gore’s appearance before Congress today proved to be a good day for those who don’t believe that Global Warming is caused by human activity.
Here is the opening statement by U.S. Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma during Senate hearings. Here are some interesting charts used by Senator Inhofe.
Reid Bryson, Emeritus Professor of Meteorology, of Geography and of Environmental
Studies. Senior Scientist, Center for Climatic Research, The Gaylord Nelson
Institute for Environmental Studies (Founding Director), the University of
Wisconsin, Madison, has changed his position about global warming. Here is a piece written by Dr. Bryson in March 2004.
Nir Shaviv, an Israeli astrophysicist, used to be a believer in human induced global warming. But, he too, has changed his position. Here is a Link to a recent article about Dr. Shaviv.
It has been interesting to review hundreds of articles, and comments from readers of this blog. However, I won’t be supporting the “Carbon cap” bill in the Minnesota Senate this year. I simply don’t accept that global warming is caused by humans. The cost of the “cure” would be worse than the disease.
Al Gore refused to sign a pledge (at today’s Congressional hearings) to reduce his personal energy use by March,2008. How can he ask anyone else to limit their use, or say that we should never build another coal generated electric plant? But, the proponents still have renowned scientist, Katie Couric, on their side.
There are still many reasons to reduce our energy consumption. There are compelling reasons to have strong environmental laws against air pollution. But, Carbon Dioxide is not a pollutant.
Tom,
You say:
The cost of the “cure” would be worse than the disease.
What is the cost of doing nothing or do you have an alternative proposal?
After viewing Inconvenient Truth and The Great Global Warming Swindle as well as The Competitive Enterprise Institute has distributed a 140 page response to Al Gore’s film, I cannot logically believe that anything we could do short of what we’ve already done (emission legislation) could make any more of an appreciable difference since human-induced CO2 accounts for a paltry .04% of the total greenhouse gases and since increased CO2 does not cause global warming… global warming causes an increase in CO2 with up to 800 to 1000 year lag-time. Meaning temperatures must first rise for several hundred years to produce appreciably increased levels of CO2. Al Gore’s assertions just don’t make sense to the top Paleo-Climatologists and environmental scientist. Rev. Gore can preach all he wants to…I’m not sending my tithes to the First Church of Gorey EnviroMENTALism.
Tom: CO2 is not a pollutant? That’s like saying a dandilion is not a weed, just because when my grandfather was young, they used to have lawns full of them and make dandilion wine. Now there’s a lawn-care industry whose economic health depends on defining it that way.
To someone in an automobile with a running engine in a closed garage, CO2 would be poisonous and could be described as a pollutant. If human-made CO2 is, in fact, a cause of global warming, then we simply need to broaden our definitions. No one thought hair spray flurocarbons were a problem at one time either.
Dewaun seems to be in the camp of those who firmly believe that warming comes first, and then CO2. I don’t know how he arrives at his rating for the “top” Paleo-Climatologists.
Tom, here are links to two recent articles from Reuters, one that was somewhat pessimistic about the US role in the next G8 summit whose focus will be global warming, and the other more hopeful:
March 17: (less hopeful)
U.S. odd man out in climate consensus
http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSL1672195320070319
March 16: (more hopeful, but by the same writer –?!–)
US to join fight against climate change-G8 ministers
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L16721953.htm
[…] Global Warming: The “Skeptics are increasing” […]