Analyzing Global Warming Science

Even though we are heading into a Presidential campaign here, we should not forget some of the more relevent issues we have been studying over the past several years. One of those issues is Global Warming and the human (non) influence factor.

William F. Jasper of The New American magazine interviwed Dr. Arthur Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. Some excerpts follow:

THE NEW AMERICAN: Flip on any channel, open any newspaper or magazine, and it’s clear we are being bombarded with the message that the Earth is warming. Is there any merit to this claim? Dr. Arthur Robinson: Yes, but the temperature is only going up 0.5° C per century. Moreover, this increase is not being caused by human activity. TNA: Those who blame mankind for causing global warming would respond to that point by saying that the Earth is the warmest it’s been in 400 years, and that’s significant. Dr. Robinson: They’re right, but they only show you the data from the last 400 years. If the data for a longer time interval is considered, temperatures today are seen to be not especially warm. The current temperature is about average for the past 3,000 years. It was much warmer during the Medieval Climate Optimum 1,000 years ago (see Figure 1). The climate, as we know from historical records, was just fine during that warm period. In fact, it was a little better. So, yes, it is the warmest in 400 years.

Now, the usual cop-out to this is that oil companies are paying off scientists to speak out against Global Warming alarmists. Unfortunately, no one seems to be getting that money.

TNA: Scientists who are not intimidated to speak out about this are typically charged by the enviros as being paid by the oil companies. Dr. Robinson: Well, we’ve never been fortunate enough to receive any money from them, and I mean in any way, personally, professionally in our laboratory, or anything. We have never received a dime from anybody who has a specific economic interest in this issue. However, UN power to control and ration world energy — the real goal of their activities — would have a terrible, negative impact on the lives of all Americans. In that sense, all of our supporters have an economic interest. TNA: Al Gore also makes a big deal about glacier recession. Dr. Robinson: But he only shows the data for the limited time intervals that seem to support his claims. Here is the world glacier curve (see Figure 2) based on an average of all the world’s glaciers for which there are good records. Some glaciers are actually increasing, but on average the glaciers are decreasing — toward the more normal lengths that are typical of long-term average world temperatures. This curve is offset by 20 years because there is about a 20-year lag between the temperature increase and the shortening of the glaciers. So the temperature increase reflected in the glacier lengths begins in about 1800. The glaciers have been shortening for 200 years. They started shortening a century before significant amounts of CO2 were produced by human activity. Notice also that the shortening is linear. Hydrocarbon use increased six-fold and the glacier melting rate did not change at all.

Yes, more evidence that Al Gore "cherry picked" his data. I wonder how much he paid his own scientists to do that?

More:

TNA: So what is causing the Earth to warm? Dr. Robinson: A good clue is contained in data showing arctic air temperature vs. solar activity (see Figure 3). There is a good correlation. Surface temperature vs. solar activity data also correlates well (see Figure 4). TNA: What about Gore’s demonstration in his movie, with those very large graphs, that CO2 tracks right along with temperature and is, therefore, the cause of that warming? Dr. Robinson: In those curves, the temperature goes up before the CO2 and goes down before the CO2. The CO2 lags the temperature. And the reason it does is that the CO2 rise is caused by the temperature rise rather than vice versa. As temperatures rise, carbon dioxide is released from the oceans, just as the carbon dioxide is released from soft drinks when their temperature rises. Gore shows the curves with poor resolution, so that this cannot be seen by the viewer. His film is filled with dozens of other deliberate errors and misrepresentations.

Isn't it amazing how most of this data and information never makes into leftist movies or onto the leftist TV News shows? Just showing the following graph and having an impartial scientist explain it would go a long way to cooling the hype about Global Warming and its true causes:



This is one of the best interviews about Global Warming I have ever read.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Analyzing Global Warming Science
William F. Jasper
The New American
February 18, 2008