The Tipping Point

The Washington Post is running an article called

Warming debate shifts to ‘tipping point’

Some scientists worry it’s too late to reverse climate change

In this article, they take the leap of faith that scientists have concluded that global warming has been accepted, so what’s the next step?  This leads to “the tipping point”.  At that point three things could potentially occur:

  1. widespread coral bleaching that could damage the world’s fisheries within three decades
  2. sea level rise by the end of the century that would take tens of thousands of years to reverse
  3. within 200 years, a shutdown of the ocean current that moderates temperatures in northern Europe

Now, my gripe with the global warming argument politically has been that the world expects the US to carry the brunt of fixing it.  I can see some merit to that argument, we have the most money.  However, if the US fixes everything that’s wrong here, there’s nothing to stop China and other developing countries from abusing the ecology in much worse ways than the US is now.  There are some obvious things the entire world could be doing now, but they are a tough economic pill to swallow.  Until I’m expected to swallow that pill, I want to know that it’s not in vain. When I see China doing the things they need to be doing to thwart “the tipping point” and Brazil stops destroying their rain forests, I’ll be a lot more agreeable to reacting to what so far has been an unproven theory.  Just because we’ve had a couple of warm years does not prove the Earth is heading for an ecological meltdown.  The things that have been thrown at me as proof, such as hurricanes, have in reality been shown to be returning to normal levels of previous years that they don’t include in their message.  When the global warmists start putting what is happening now in perspective to the entire picture instead of nitpicking the facts they want to use, then I’ll be more receptive.

Note to the Washington Post, I don’t think global warming on the scale they’re describing has been accepted.  Referring to “some scientists” and then assuming it’s generally accepted is misleading.  And, that’s primarily what’s undermining the entire argument they are pushing.

2005 Hottest Year “on record”?

OK, here’s today’s overwhelming headline:

2005 Was the Hottest Year on Record

And, here’s the meat:

Gulthek writes As predicted, 2005 was the hottest year since accurate temperature recording began in the late 1800s. This news is all the more interesting because 2005 was not an “El Niño” year like 1998, the previous record holder.”

Of course they give all kinds of charts and graphs to support the “as predicted”:


However, note the “since accurate temperature recording began in the late 1800’s” part.  What that does is eliminate periods of the Earth when this was the norm:

Now, in those days, the average atmospheric temperatures were about 18 to 54 degrees warmer than they are now.  And, there is no evidence whatsoever that El Nino’s existed at all at that time.  Most likely they didn’t.  That was 251 million years ago.  Now, the point I’m getting at is although “accurate temperature recording began in the late 1800’s” things have warmed up, the period of time between the late 1800’s and now is totally an insignificant period of time in regards to the Earth’s history.  Think about this way, I have graphed the relative amount of data the we have to work with (post 1800’s), against the data we’re not allowing to be “reliable”.  The “reliable” data is in red:

I couldn’t make the red part any smaller or it was impossible to see.  In fact, most of you won’t even see the red, it’s off the screen.  It’s certainly an insignificant period of time to come to the radical conclusions global warming activists are coming to in order to “save the planet”.

Now, about 251 million years ago, things got pretty bad here on Earth.  But, you know what?  The planet kept right on going. The question is not whether we’re destroying Earth or not.  Earth will keep on keeping on.  The question is how will Man survive in changing environments.  And, whether we burn gasoline or hydrogen, the environment WILL change.  Don’t tell me the sky’s falling because of that changing environment.  Tell me how I can survive.