Global Climate Change vs Global Warming
This is a hot topic. There’s no denying it. Yet most people are arguing about the wrong thing! Ever since former Vice President Al Gore established himself as the poster child for liberal environmentalists around the world with his book and movie, An Inconvenient Truth, the whole argument has been framed incorrectly.
In a previous article we examined some of Gore’s faulty claims and inaccurate predictions. Subsequently, the debate and discussions continue, picking up on our shift in terminology from “Global Warming” to “Global Climate Change,” but not losing the emphasis on shining the light into the dim areas of climate science. It’s easy to get sidetracked by Al Gore’s alarmist rhetoric so let me refer you to the previous article where that’s addressed and keep the focus here where it should be…examining the cause of climate change.
The Question of Causation
Many who participate in this debate jump so quickly into defending their positions that they fail to realize the underlying assumptions driving the very thing for which they’re fighting. For supporters of increased regulation, they assume that humans are the primary drivers of climate change and, therefore, by regulating human action, climate change can be stopped or reversed. Here’s the problem: Global Climate Change has happened in the past…before humans were driving cars, generating power from coal-fueled power plants, or paving roads.
Richard Lindzen points out in his piece Resisting Climate Hysteria, “Climate is always changing. We have had ice ages and warmer periods when alligators were found in Spitzbergen. Ice ages have occurred in a hundred thousand year cycle for the last 700 thousand years, and there have been previous periods that appear to have been warmer than the present despite CO2 levels being lower than they are now.” It’s the “susceptibility of the public to the substitution of repetition for truth, and the exploitation of these weaknesses by politicians, environmental promoters, and, 20 years of media drum beating” that has led the scientifically illiterate masses to their incorrect assumptions.
Before we pass laws to reign in carbon emissions and regulate free trade completely to death, we ought to understand whether or not those actions will truly have the expected outcomes. The reality is that we find ourselves situated in the middle of a larger climate trend and it’s not the first time the Earth has experienced it (even though it is for each of us). Capping CO2 emissions, regulating the trade of carbon credits, and governing our economy to a standstill won’t do a thing to stop global climate conditions that have been occurring long before humans got involved. It’s a special kind of arrogance that we possess which assumes we are always the cause and, therefore, we are also the solution.
Shame on you Nobel Prize Committee
Now let’s circle back for a moment to that patron saint of man-made environmental doom, Al Gore. In 2007 Gore and the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) received the Nobel Peace Prize “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change.” The Nobel Prize and especially the Peace Prize is a highly respected honor and places it’s recipients among some of the most philanthropic, selfless, and impactful people in the world. “It’s simply not right,” says Florida business owner John Arwood, “Al Gore received the Nobel Peace Prize for spreading the word about the effects of man-made global warming and climate change. And now, after so many inaccurate predictions and misleading assumptions have come to light, I think the Nobel Committee should take it back. He was predicting a total melt of the ice caps by last year but it simply has not happened. I’m sure there were many other more humanitarians in 2007 that are actually deserving of this award.”
Arwood makes a good point. According to the Science and Public Policy Institute’s report 35 Inconvenient Truths and many other well documented sources, the validity of Gore’s and the IPCC’s information is no longer to be trusted. It is turning out to be fiction and should be reconsidered by the Nobel Prize Committee. Hopefully, a better understanding of the facts of global climate change will lead to a better informed public going forward.