Climate Change Arguments

Premise: The case for manmade global warming is simplistic, counterintuitive, inconclusive, unwarranted by proffered evidence, and inconsistent with paleoclimate precedent.


Argument one: In comparing the size of the atmosphere to the developed, carbon based fuel consuming areas of the world, and recognizing that more than 70% of the world’s surface is either covered by ocean or consists of other unpopulated regions while the atmosphere encompasses the entire earth several miles deep, it seems disproportionate that enough carbon dioxide would be produced by man’s activities to have a significant effect on the average temperature of the entire globe. Reinforcing this notion is the observations that the activities of man are not the only producers of carbon dioxide, and that carbon dioxide is not the only or most powerful greenhouse gas. A widely publicized graph demonstrates that atmospheric carbon dioxide increases with a rise in temperature and decreases with a fall in temperature over hundreds of thousands of years. This graph is intended to show that carbon dioxide is the cause of global temperature increases. It also shows, even more clearly, that atmospheric carbon dioxide varies widely in the absence of any manmade influences.

Argument two: The magnitude of the increases in temperature during the last 150 years, at less than one degree Celsius, and the increases in carbon dioxide content of the atmosphere during the same time period, at 100+/- parts per million, are far too small to be significant. These increases are most likely within the margins of error in comparing readings over such a long period of time considering the improvements in the technology of measuring devices and in measuring techniques, or within the normal range of historic variations. It is well known that this magnitude of temperature variation occurs from year to year, decade to decade, and, no doubt, from century to century. There is within recorded history an era significantly warmer than today followed by an era known as the “little ice age.” The current era of so-called manmade global warming is easily within normal variations.

Argument three:  It is well known that earth’s climate has varied dramatically over geologic time independent of any manmade influences. ICE AGES as well as more tropical ages have been occurring for millions of years. During the past four hundred thousand years, four ice ages interspersed by four warm periods have occurred. The cooling periods averaged eighty thousand years in duration while the warming periods persisted twenty thousand years on average. The depth of the last cool period occurred twenty thousand years ago and the climate has been warming intermittently ever since. We do not necessarily know and understand why this occurs, but the trend is unmistakable: we are probably on the verge of a cooling period as we worry about a minor global warming. Twenty thousand years ago, much of the northern hemisphere was covered by massive sheets of ice thousands of feet thick. It seems reasonable to expect that the climate will continue to warm until the next ice age begins no matter what humans do. The most obvious failure of the Manmade Global Warming Through Carbon Dioxide argument is the absence of explanations for all the preindustrial climate variations over millions of years. In effect, they are saying “natural causes were responsible for global climate changes in the past, but we are certain that human produced carbon dioxide is causing climate change now because the warming is more rapid than prehistoric warming.” The claim that warming is occurring more rapidly than in prehistoric times depends on being able to know prehistoric temperature within fractions of one degree and rate of increase in temperature during 150 year periods, all from tree rings, ice cores, and other proxy estimates. This is absurdly simplistic and implausible in view of the extreme difficulty in determining present average global temperature. If warming is to be expected at this time, and if we know that the climate has been warming (in fits and starts) for about twenty thousand years, and if we know that ice ages followed by warming periods have occurred many times over millions of years, and if we know that atmospheric carbon dioxide has varied widely over millions of years, why has it suddenly been concluded that this current possible slight warming of a fraction of one degree is due to a manmade carbon dioxide increase of one part in ten thousand?

Argument four:  It is becoming clear to independent thinkers that the most controlling influence on Global Climate is the powerful and prevalent greenhouse gas, water vapor. As vapor, it acts as an insulator, preventing heat from escaping into space. As clouds, it reflects solar radiation preventing heat from reaching the earth. An intriguing hypothesis is that that solar radiation shields the earth’s atmosphere from cosmic rays incoming from outer space. When the sun is in a quiet period this shielding effect is reduced and cosmic radiation, by means of an ionizing process, increases the formation of clouds, resulting in atmospheric cooling. Conversely, when the sun is in an active phase, less clouding forms, resulting in atmospheric warming. In addition, it is known that earth’s magnetic field also has an important effect on the strength of cosmic radiation so that variations in climate could also be related to variations in the magnetic field. With all focus on carbon dioxide, there is not sufficient funding to study these commonsense theories and there is an almost complete lack of media attention to them.