This is just an initial posting on a topic that I will, no doubt, visit again and again during the course of my blogging career (hobby). Global warming is a topic that is deriving a great deal of attention from people all over the world, and deservedly so. Whether you are for or against taking action on global warming, you should be greatly concerned because scientists and politicians all over the world are talking about spending trillions of dollars and shifting corporate dominance from some industries to others by decree. If governments take the action that scientists are urging it may greatly affect your wealth, what job you have and possibly even where you are able to live. If they fail to take this action it may greatly affect your wealth, what job you have and possibly even where you are able to live. In either case, moreover, it is no stretch to see that at least some parts of the world (maybe yours) are likely to be affected in terms of quality of life, national (political) power and susceptibility to war. Island nations and coastal cities may or may not be inundated by rising seas. Species of animals may or may not go extinct. Populations may or may not have to shift geographically. In short, whether or not the world's governments take action on global warming and, if they do, what action they take or don't take, IS IMPORTANT!
Here, at the close of 2009, shortly after the close of (yes, I'll say it point blank) the ineffective, failed Copenhagen Conference, there is almost no scientific controversy over the clearly established fact that the world is warming climatically. There is also no scientific controversy over the fact that some significant portion of this warming is due to anthropogenic factors (caused by human activities). The only real controversy among scientists is over what number to put at measuring this anthropogenic portion and in how many degrees centigrade global temperature will be raised by some target date.
In this short posting I would simply like to focus attention on the NEED FOR EVIDENCE, no matter what your position is. I never cease to be amazed, truly amazed, when people arguing for or against taking action on any given postulation, be it political, economic, ecological or what have you, do so without consideration of or reference to the evidence. Whether your views match mine, parallel mine or directly oppose mine, they will be of interest to me and have a chance of affecting my position only if they are accompanied by or refer me to the readily accessible hard evidence (not just some other 'experts' conclusion) upon which your views are based. No matter who your favourite or most trusted authorities are, authority itself is not a scientific argument. No evidence-based position becomes less respectable simply because it is favoured or put forward by a fool or a liar. No evidence-based position becomes more respectable simply because it is favoured or put forward by a well liked and trusted authority.
So, please people, present your evidence, or refer me to that accessible evidence, for whichever action or inaction you care to propose. I find truly horrifying the amount of shear blather that is out there on radio, television and the net, which can never be considered anything other than blather simply because no effort is made to refer the listener to the evidence, or some readily accessible source of the evidence, for or against any particular position.
My personal position on the reality of global warming, having reviewed a great deal of published evidence over the course of several decades, is that global climatic warming is incontrovertibly occurring. In line with my comments above, I should either present the evidence here, or I should direct the reader to a reference for the evidence. I will do so, very simply, thus: Go to the web-searching site of your choice (I like Google) type in "weather records" plus the name of the city, province and country of your choice. You will quickly be presented with a list of numerous sites at which you can see, free of charge, the daily weather records of at least one weather station in or near that city. Compare those weather records with the long term, 30 year averages for the same site (a standard reference in climatology). This requires no particular scientific education, just the ability to add, subtract and divide. Weather, averaged over decades, equals climate. Do this for weather stations all over the world and you will be convinced that, even though some sites have cooled, globally the planet has warmed measurably, especially in the far northern and far southern regions. Case closed! Don't try to sway me with cracks about conspiracy theories or reference to some jerk who got caught in a lie. Those comments are irrelevant. All that really counts is the hard evidence for warming and that is readily available to anyone who cares to look, free of charge.
Now, as to the case for how much of this warming is due to anthropogenic causes, I cannot express a firm opinion as I have not done a personal study and cannot put numbers to the mensuration of anthropogenic causes relative to the observed amount of global warming. What I can say is this: We, as a species, are pouring billions of tons of carbon-dioxide and methane into the atmosphere every year (again a simple internet search of "tons of carbon-dioxide" or "tons of methane" will present a list of numerous sites that put hard numbers to this). These gasses have measurable and measured effects as warming "greenhouse" gasses (the hard numbers freely and readily available on the net). I would love to have someone explain to me, with evidence, how we can possibly do this year after year after year and not contribute significantly to the observed warming of the planet. Please someone, if you read this and think you can present such an evidence-based argument, leave me a comment at the end of this posting; I would love to hear from you.
In summary: opinion, minus evidence, can be OK. We should all feel free to express an opinion on many topics even if that opinion is based only on a feeling or a hope. However, if the opinion takes the form of a recommendation for or against taking action on something as potentially life altering as global warming, base your opinion on hard and publicly accessible evidence or your opinion simply isn't worth the time it takes to hear it.
No comments:
Post a Comment