Amazing, A Balanced Editorial on Global Warming From the Post

Imagine that an editorial about Global Warming from the usually Liberal Post. Mr. Samuelson takes a realistic view on the hype which has been coming from the tree huggers and Chicken Little's about the urgency and calamatous impact of climate change. He hasn't gone so far as to dispute the poor science which is so often cited as proof of anthropogenic climate change.

Global Warming and Hot Air

By Robert J. Samuelson
Wednesday, February 7, 2007; Page A17

You could be excused for thinking that we'll soon do something serious about global warming. Last Friday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) -- an international group of scientists -- concluded that, to a 90 percent probability, human activity is warming the Earth. Earlier, Democratic congressional leaders made global warming legislation a top priority; and 10 big U.S. companies (including General Electric and DuPont) endorsed federal regulation. Strong action seems at hand.

Don't be fooled. The dirty secret about global warming is this: We have no solution. About 80 percent of the world's energy comes from fossil fuels (coal, oil, natural gas), the main sources of man-made greenhouse gases. Energy use sustains economic growth, which -- in all modern societies -- buttresses political and social stability. Until we can replace fossil fuels or find practical ways to capture their emissions, governments will not sanction the deep energy cuts that would truly affect global warming.

Considering this reality, you should treat the pious exhortations to "do something" with skepticism, disbelief or contempt. These pronouncements are (take your pick) naive, self-interested, misinformed, stupid or dishonest. Politicians mainly want to be seen as reducing global warming. Companies want to polish their images and exploit markets created by new environmental regulations. As for editorialists and pundits, there's no explanation except superficiality or herd behavior.

-------------------snip------------------

Since 1850, global temperatures have increased almost 1 degree Celsius. Sea level has risen about seven inches, though the connection is unclear. So far, global warming has been a change, not a calamity. The IPCC projects wide ranges for the next century: temperature increases from 1.1 degrees Celsius to 6.4 degrees; sea level rises from seven inches to almost two feet. People might easily adapt; or there might be costly disruptions (say, frequent flooding of coastal cities resulting from melting polar ice caps).

Samuelson is, of course, correct about the wide variations in predictions coming from the alarmists. That is because it is a pseudo science and the predictions are based on models constructed by environmentalists who are convinced of the premise before they have even investigated the principles. That is what is commonly called "bad science."

The primary tenant of scientific investigation is to approach every hypothesis with a healthy skepticism and to be open to the possibility that their hypothesis may be wrong. That is why the investigative process is called "experimentation" rather than "proving."

There is more evidence that climate change is due to natural variations which occur in solar radiation, the Earth's orbit, and the precession of the axis during the Earth's rotation. Reinforcing this evidence is the recently observed climate change on Mars.

Congratulations Mr. Samuelson for imparting a little reason into the discussion.

What do you think?

To leave your opinion click on the word "COMMENT(S)" below