Over the past few weeks I have had many opportunities to discuss the theory of anthropogenic global warming with a variety of people. Most of these people have little to no scientific background, but they were shocked to find that I was a skeptic of the theory that the CO2 emissions would cause the Earth to warm up. One of these people is a member of a national college debate team. That discussion was interesting because science played no role, it was all about the number of people that support global warming and those that are skeptical of global warming.
Discussing the science of global warming takes a while. It took me a whole book to detail the science against the theory of global warming. The proxy against an actual discussion of the science is to ask skeptics “How can the theory be wrong when scientists think it is correct?” There is nothing scientific about this question, it is simply an appeal to authority.
A while back I wrote this article about competing scientific theories. In science it is common that differing theories are very contradictory to each other. The thing that is more impressive about the case study of competing scientific theories is that the scientists involved in the velociraptor debate did not call the other side flat-earthers or anti-science. They simply presented their evidence and proceed forward trying to find more evidence to support their theory. At least from what I have seen, they have remained civil, even while they have competing theories.
This has not happened in the global warming debate. Nor is most of the evidence that is presented by the warmists science. Presenting a picture of a glacier is not scientific evidence. That is an emotional appeal that is designed to bypass a scientific analysis. Much of what I discuss on this website is related to the Fear and Misinformation that is presented as science, but is really an emotional appeal.
One recent study fro Yale found that lack of science plays no role in a person’s view of global warming. Of the 1,500 people involved in their study they found that skeptics scored as well at scientific literacy as any other group. The more education and scientific literacy a person had, really determined how strong their views were about global warming. The polarization increased with scientific literacy and critical thinking skills.
Consider that for a moment. The best indicator for being a strong global warming skeptic is having a high level of scientific literacy, but a differing world view. I can only speak for myself in this, but I know that when I started my research I was only trying to determine the science. If I had found the science convincing, I would be supporting the theory of global warming. I was a bit surprised to find out just how misleading much of the scientific arguments for global warming are. It is perhaps the greatest FUBAR in scientific history.
The problem for the warmists today is that the public is losing interest in global warming. The Earth is not changing as they predicted 20 years ago. It is 2012 and we don’t have flying cars and winter is still cold (some years more and some years less). In Boise, Idaho we had fresh snow on the mountains a few days back. It was the latest snow I have ever seen fall. This picture was taken on June 9th, 2012 in the afternoon.
While there has been recent news about the Spring in the United States being unusually warm, there was nothing unusual with the temperature globally. It is that cherry picking of news to push global warming that is so frustrating and distracting for those that are looking at the science. Skeptics spend their time looking at the silly news about weather events (like the unusual snow in June which ended up shortening a local triathlon).
The latest global silliness has to do with sustainability. I am all for sustainable energy and efficient use of resources, but that is not what this program is about. I have not yet had time to delve into the depths of this, but I will be studying this issue more in the next few weeks. The human race has a long history of doom and gloom predications that never pan out. One hundred years ago it was predicted that cities would not be able to cope with all the horse manure. Then it was the Earth could not handle 4 billion people, then 5 billion, 6 billion and so forth. Today there are 7 billion people and the overall standard of living is higher than it has ever been before.
The biggest problems today are self limiting because of fear. That is the real weapon that is used to push global warming, biodiversity, ocean acidification and sustainability. Science does not support any of these fears, yet the push for them remains. If they do come up with a scientifically sound danger, I will let you know.