The Prism of Reality and Perception
A holistic approach to global warming looks to manage our understanding of reality using our minds to put all of the pieces together into some kind of meaningful whole. To look at nature objectively, making sense of reality is a scientific endeavor and one of humanity’s greatest challenges and its purest attempt at valuing truth for its own sake; and, the holistic perception of climate change to the modern mind is wholly irrelevant to that endeavor.
As is well-known, we are blamed for causing a global warming mainly because our burning of fossil fuels is increasing the carbon dioxide (CO2) concentration in the atmosphere. Since this is a greenhouse gas, we must be warming the climate. ~Daniel Botkin (Ibid.)
What we actually know to be true about humanity’s impact on the world is not alarming. Only the allegations about humanity’s disastrous impact on the world is alarming. “What is the evidence,” Botkin asks, “that sea level is rising, that wildfires, drought, and episodes of very high temperatures are increasing, and what is the evidence that such changes are our fault?”
What we’re learning is being skeptical about what we think is reality is not natural at all. Scientific thinking is not holistic thinking. Thinking holistically has it virtues but its also an excuse for sloppy thinking, like adding shades of gray between the pencil lines to form a picture.
Sure, sure, temperatures may be warmer in an area where humans chop down shade trees, blacktop streets, park cars and barbeque sides of beef over a mesquite fire. But, that is not global warming. The heat resulting from that sort of human-contribution is known as the urban heat island (UHI) effect –e.g., the heat from tailpipes, from motors that run air conditioners, heat generated by computers, fires in water heaters and fireplaces, blacktop streets that collect instead of reflect solar heat, buildings that block cooling breezes, etc. Heat due to UHI is only a local not a global phenomenon, despite a faintly irrational impulse to see examples of UHI and then label every inconvenient weather-related event an act of man, not God (especially for those who believe men are oil-driven evil doers whereas God is nothing more than a Judeo-Christian illusion).
Carbon dioxide is definitely continuing to increase in the atmosphere, but Earth’s surface and atmospheric temperatures aren’t tracking it. ~Daniel Botkin (Ibid.)
Looking at something holistically is our touchy-feely way of viewing reality. When, however, significant consequences are associated with our views, the holism concept with its bottom-up, sideways and backwards view of reality should not prevent us from taking on the rigorous and more skeptical approach of a scientific inquiry, beginning with a serious look at the facts. But we can always start by looking at the world holistically –e.g.,
Now, how about the facts. Let us leave the world of the mind. If we want to do more than just speculate, we must consider the history of the physical world around us before we can know the significance of our part in it. Depending on our holistic views you may not be happy with an objective evaluation of the facts if you secretly want humanity to have a starring role in climate change.
No chemical compound in the atmosphere has a worse reputation than CO2, thanks to the single-minded demonization of this natural and essential atmospheric gas by advocates of government control… The incredible list of supposed horrors that increasing carbon dioxide will bring the world is pure belief disguised as science. ~Dr. Will Happer
Modern self-proclaimed Western climate scientists with their fixation on the twin myths of the single-mechanism causation (CO2 produced by humanity) – and, uniformitarianism – the idea that an accurate average temperature of the globe can be determined by adding up the disparate thermometer readings from a multiplicity of grids comprising the world and then feeding this data into mathematical climate models – have turned the information age into the regression age. Dr. Tim Ball says the computer models only, “created an illusion of possible resolution, with the claim that the only limit was computer size and power.
Combined with the twin specters of scary analogies and proclamations of imminent doom, the result has been the holism-based climate scenarios like those of the climate science fortune-tellers who believe humanity is, on a trajectory to an unmanageable heating scenario, and that the, climate dragon is being poked, and eventually the dragon becomes pissed off enough to trash the place.
Climate has always changed and is always changing. The last Ice Age, which covered places like what is now New York City with ice two miles deep ended between 17,000 and 12,500 years ago, with overall but highly variable warming since then. Among the variations during the last thousand or so years, there was a warming period lasting approximately 300 years, from A.D. 950 to 1250, known as the Medieval Warm Period… followed by the Little Ice Age, which lasted from approximately mid-1400 to 1700 A.D… Swiss Alps [glaciers] advanced to the extent that they filled valleys and destroyed villages. Areas to the north that had enjoyed abundant crop production were under ice. This was the time when the human population was devastated by the Black Plague… It was also the time of the early European settlement of the United States… A warming trend started in the mid-nineteenth century. This was interrupted from about 1940 to 1960 by a cooling, and then the temperature rose until about 20 years ago… Earth’s surface temperature has not changed for the past 19 years, and 16-26 years for the lower atmosphere… ~Daniel Botkin (Ibid.)
The facts give us a different picture. The global warming socio-political establishment is propped up by myths. One is that we live in a era of man-made climate change and that we can have no climate change or stop it from changing too much if we only listen to the advice of academia. Another is that, acting through a Eurocommunist-style, secular, socialist federal government, academia says we can curb humanity’s production of CO2. Moreover, academia believes we can and must limit the increase of the average temperature of the globe to no more than 2°C above pre-industrial levels and that academia can determine the globe’s average temperature. But, we’ve also learned that the temperature record is a myth:
In my opinion, though, a bigger problem than the spotty sampling of the thermometer data is the endless adjustment game applied to the thermometer data. The thermometer network is made up of a patchwork of non-research quality instruments that were never made to monitor long-term temperature changes to tenths or hundredths of a degree… Furthermore, land-based thermometers are placed where people live, and people build stuff, often replacing cooling vegetation with manmade structures that cause an artificial warming (urban heat island, UHI) effect right around the thermometer. The data adjustment processes in place cannot reliably remove the UHI effect because it can’t be distinguished from real global warming. ~Dr. Roy Spencer
We have to stop pretending that the mathematical models of climate science are in any way accurate and up to the task of predicting our future. If we want to solve anomalies like the Growing Himalayan Glaciers, we would have to reduce the grid size used to 50- instead of 210-kilometer squares, if we want to at least attempt to give some measure of accuracy to the failed climate models of Western academia. Only then can we explain why, instead of shrinking due to rising levels of atmospheric CO2, the Karakoram glaciers can be expected to continue growing past 2100.
Rather than through the eyes of a medicine man, Daniel Botkin is looking at the world like a scientist. Life in the real also requires common sense. “Even though our activities are adding carbon dioxide rapidly to the atmosphere,” says Botkin, “it seems to be having no effect right now on Earth’s average surface and lower atmosphere temperature.” ~Daniel Botkin