“Collapse of Antarctic ice shelves could lead
to dramatic sea level rise.” (the guardian)
How reasonable is it for us to worry about what is going to happen by the end of this century? Michael Crichton addressed thinking like this: why would our speculations about what will be in 2100 be any better than people in 1900 predicting what the world would be like in 2000? We’re bound to be wrong:
To predict anything about the world a hundred years from now is simply absurd.
Look: If I was selling stock in a company that I told you would be profitable in 2100, would you buy it? Or would you think the idea was so crazy that it must be a scam?
Let’s think back to people in 1900 in, say, New York. If they worried about people in 2000, what would they worry about? Probably: Where would people get enough horses? And what would they do about all the horseshit? Horse pollution was bad in 1900, think how much worse it would be a century later, with so many more people riding horses?
But of course, within a few years, nobody rode horses except for sport. And in 2000, France was getting 80% its power from an energy source that was unknown in 1900. Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and Japan were getting more than 30% from this source, unknown in 1900. Remember, people in 1900 didn’t know what an atom was. They didn’t know its structure. They also didn’t know what a radio was, or an airport, or a movie, or a television, or a computer, or a cell phone, or a jet, an antibiotic, a rocket, a satellite, an MRI, ICU, IUD, IBM, IRA, ERA, EEG, EPA, IRS, DOD, PCP, HTML, internet. interferon, instant replay, remote sensing, remote control, speed dialing, gene therapy, gene splicing, genes, spot welding, heat-seeking, bipolar, prozac, leotards, lap dancing, email, tape recorder, CDs, airbags, plastic explosive, plastic, robots, cars, liposuction, transduction, superconduction, dish antennas, step aerobics, smoothies, twelve-step, ultrasound, nylon, rayon, teflon, fiber optics, carpal tunnel, laser surgery, laparoscopy, corneal transplant, kidney transplant, AIDS…
No one advocates paving over the world. Except for government scientists who defend their placement of official thermometers in urban areas, no one disputes the existence of the UHI (Urban Heat Island) effect (an urban heat island is city made hotter than rural areas by human activities).
Still, looking at the world and not thermometers in cities outside Western classrooms by air conditioners and parking lots, there has been no global warming going on 2 decades and nearly 3 decades depending on the data set and method used to arrive at an average temperature of the entire globe. In the real and not digitized world of the global warming alarmists, the concept of a global ‘average’ temperature is nothing more than fallacious reductionist logic because temperature is an intensive variable: an average temperature has no more meaning than the average number of letters in all the names in a phone book.
The industrial-military complex was rolled back years ago. Leftists and liberals cared more about saving billions than the thousands of careers that were cut short as mid-career employees in their 50s got pink slipped out of work. Now we’ve got a government-education complex and government bureaucracy that is in serious need of a rollback.
The simple fact of the matter is, like gravity, climate change will always be there whether humans are around to theorize about it or not. Theorize all you want but no one is so stupid as to step out off of a 10-story building. You can’t stop gravity nor warm the oceans. The oceans will continue to warm and cool without and despite human intervention just like they always have. The Sun will continue to heat the oceans or not, without our help, and there’s nothing humans can do about it and that’s not a theory: it is a fact, even if we eagerly sacrifice the constitution, the country, capitalism, liberty and the scientific method on the altar of global warming alarmism because we read in the NYT that humanity’s CO2 is a dangerous pollutant that causes global warming [i.e., AGW theory]. Nevertheless, when the oceans begin to cool there will be no global warming, irrespective of Westerners’ theorizing about AGW.
More striking is that the [AGW] hypothesis is not testable. It cannot be falsified. The alternate hypothesis, the network hypothesis, is rooted in observation… They are consistent with the hypothesis, and in time – years to decades – this hypothesis is testable and falsifiable. ~Marcia Wyatt
The network hypothesis is pretty much summed up by the belief that increasing the amount in ppm of atmospheric CO2 has about as much effect on global warming as barbequing hot dogs in the backyard has on a thermostat in the house and what effect it arguably does have is counteracted by nature turning on the a/c.
“…we scientists really don’t know what climate
is doing or will do! No one does.” ~Marcia Wyatt