THE CLIMATE CHANGE "DEBATE"
The Copenhagen Conference will not be a debate, but an attempt to force the issue.
Recently, a member of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was seen prefacing an answer to a reporter's question with: "Now that climate change is no longer debated".
What did this un-named, faceless, bureaucrat mean? Did he know how right, and wrong, he was?
Doubtless, one can see where this brief discussion is heading. Climate Change is no longer debated. It happens. But our esteemed member of IPCC was inferring that the debate about climate change NOT happening has ended. Well, I'd have to agree, but not for the reasons, or lack thereof, that followed in his morals-laden answer.
He thinks that climate-change deniers been denying the existance of climate change, and holding this idea forth as a golden goose-egg of victory over the blasphemous.
Sorry, we haven't denyed it, at all.
Climate change is happening, as it has since this planet had an atmosphere. Changing up, changing down. Along with sea level. Breathing in and out. Moist or dry, through the eons. It's a natural characteristic of Earth's dynamic system.
Yet, magically, now that Industrial Humans are on the Earth, we turn up the hubris a tad and demand that what has always been changing should somehow become constant and immutable.
So who are the REAL climate-change deniers? The IPCC and its horde of shrill spokespeople. They want the world to buy into a paradigm that holds forth the premise that climate change must be somehow be halted, before sea level inundates the immutable coastlines of the world.
This is in the face of all evidence to the contrary. The two most sacred premises held to be necessarily constant (Climate & Sea Level), are undeniably variable. Our planet has been a ball of Ice, and a steamy Fogball, more than once. Where were the evil-belching humans then? What will the IPCC do if a volcano the likes of Yellowstone or Toba decides to clear its throat? Coastlines, through all manner of natural mechanisms, have demonstrated an unsettling habit of moving all over the place. Dinosaurs munched lush jungle salad on Ellesmere Island. In case one hasn't noticed, Copenhagen was under a kilometer of ice a few short millenia ago. Er, did something, um, change?
One of the most sacred paradigms of the whole climate change debate is the famous "Hockey Stick Graph" used by Gore et al in "An Inconvenient Truth". The graph shows a steady decline in global temperatures until the late 20th Century, where temperatures suddenly spike upward. The graph also smooths over the temperature changes in both the "Medieval Warm Period" (when the Vikings were growing gardens on Greenland), and the 14th-Century "Little Ice Age". The graph relies on tree ring analysis to "prove" the temperature curve...when there are already many more accurate and reliable indices of climate such as oxygen isotope analysis...in other words, a graph that smooths over historically-documented and scientifically confirmed highs and lows in order to emphasize a peak of warmth supposedly caused by man's industrial activity. All of this using a shaky data source rarely considered as a reliable record of climate. After all, someone has to measure the tree rings, and secondly, filter through myriad types of feedback to assess the meaning of the dimensions.
So, how do the fear-mongers get away with it? How do they twist "evidence of climate change" into something that can be attributed to Humankind? There is no doubt that Humankind has affected Earth locally. We have rendered areas uninhabitable through nuclear discharge. We belch toxic chemicals into the atmosphere. Burn tons of dirty coal and rain soot down on the white snow, causing it to melt. We use far too much energy, to be sure. We are a filthy bunch, there is no doubt.
But Earth has a Ace up Her Sleeve. Like fleas on a dog, or mites in a pillow, she can rid herself of the pestilance of man, just as she has eliminated dinosaurs and a whole host of other creatures in various mass extinctions through geologic time. What makes us so darn special to think that we deserve to live in a phony snapshot of yesteryear? And whose idea was it to present this fantasy couched in fearsome hyperbole?
The denial of climate change falls squarely in the lap of these pseudo-scientific carnival barkers. Notice how loud they have become. Anything that happens with the weather, or nature, is now due to "climate change". And the press, eager to be on the forefront of this seismic groundswell, dutifully report every belch and hiccup. Well, d'uh, people. We are along for the ride of our lives, and a select few spokespeople in high places, with all the factual punch of the National Inquirer, have hoodwinked an equally vocal klatsch of folk-medicine experts into believing that all the carbon dioxide in the world is going to do us in.
Their climate models have a complex al-gore-rhythm, there is no doubt. One of the great myths is that there will be catastrophic sea-level rises if ice shelves and sea ice melt. WRONG, simply wrong. The Ice is already in the ocean, floating, and displacing its equivalent density in water. Does a drink overflow when the ice melts? Didn't think so.
I think it's time to start confirming climate change, vehemently. Loudly. But, I must caution, not to give fuel to these alchemist's arguments, but to soundly refute them.
And soon...because what happens if Ma Nature decides not to play along?
The email leaks of late have upped the ante in the weeks leading up to Copenhagen. Now it seems that the people most responsible for the anthropogenic climate change machine aren't on the up and up. "Climategate" is now being uttered.
"Undoubtedly you will get peeved when someone does manage to disprove your hypothesis, even merely criticise it, because we're all human. But that doesn't excuse the extreme vituperation, tribalism, spin, manipulation of facts, and scientific sloppiness on display in these emails (and, crucially, the accompanying data files), because that crosses a pretty important line between science and lobbying. Michael Mann and his allies obliterated that line many years ago."
It seems that "Mr Hockey Stick" is falling rapidly into disrepute. "And our children will still be shouldering the financial burden, long after the last climate alarmist has been strangled with the last hockey stick."
And now, we discover that the climate folks have been putting the cart before the horse...noting that the recent cooling trend doesn't fit their models! What now?
OMINOUS SILENCE IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA
Climategate: As of November 30 2009, the word still doesn't trigger an autoresponse in google search. Even though there were over 18 million results. CNN hasn't weighed in beyond a trite mention of some hacker in Britain. Probably because CNN has their folk-wisdom feet planted in the 'no longer a debate' camp, and has too much invested in the Green movement to back out and take a look.
The London Times has weighed in. Other smaller papers have published editorials, but still no shock and awe from the big boys.
An interesting blog post with an alarmist's typical tone:
IPCC Chairman weighs in and the critics pan his glossy language
Michael Mann under investigation
Enjoy the Warmth (Humankind's temporal happy accident)
CBC's Rex Murphy pans Climategate, two weeks after the fact. Non-Youtube version
Climatehagen opens with a limousine shortage!
The opening video at Copenhagen. Incredible, simply incredible.
Al Gore stumbles on the facts