Global Warming Reading List
Wednesday, September 9, 2009 at 7:56AM | Share Article Global Warming Reading List
by Deb Powers
Is global warming real? Is it man-made? Is it natural, but accelerated by man? Why is carbon dioxide so bad? Is there really more carbon in the atmosphere than their used to be? Isn't carbon dioxide part of the natural respiration cycle? So many questions... so few hard and fast answers.
When I was in school, a favorite teacher told me, "There are facts, and then there is truth. It is possible to report facts without ever reaching truth."
I see a lot of that in the debate over climate change and global warming. There are a lot of facts. Facts are indisputable. Truth, however, is harder to come by, because facts can be twisted to support a multitude of opinions - especially if you're willing to leave out the inconvenient ones, or only take a small range of them.
I am a big believer that the more you know, the more likely it is that your opinions approach truth. That's why I make a point of reading the opinions of those who believe that global warming and climate change is a myth, and following any facts they post back to their source documents. I also make a point of knowing the source of research funding to better evaluate the interpretations of the facts presented. More often than not, I end up finding that the facts presented and used as the basis to dispute climate change don't actually support the interpretation given as "truth".
In the interests of providing information to help you form your own opinions, here is a reading list of items of interest from the recent news. Pick one, pick a few, get informed - because the more you know, the closer you come to the truth.
A diferent take on global warming
A Maine meteorologist has his own theory and solution to global warming, which he says is a lead-up to a new Ice Age.
Study: Global warming would hit Utah hard
While encouraging "healthy debate" on the issue of climate change, Utah moves to respond to a study that shows how continuing trends will make Utah one of the ten states most affected by global warming in the next decades.
A Primer on Global Warming: Dispelling Myths
A bunch of facts to dispute global warming theory, or at least whether it is manmade. There is no context for any of them, and they are presented by the Heartland Institute, a conservative industry-funded think tank. The editor's note reads : [Each month, Heartland Institute Science Director Jay Lehr, Ph.D. presents evidence that mankind has no significant impact on the Earth’s climate.—Ed.]
Global Security Affected by Global Warming
Another article that accepts an ongoing debate about the origin of global warming, but acknowledges that no matter the source, there are actions necessary to ensure security in the face of coastal flooding, water insecurity and melting ice caps.
I encourage you to read widely about climate change and the global warming debate. Don't avoid opposing viewpoints - all have a voice that adds something to the debate. Just be sure that you do the due diligence so that you understand how the facts fit into the overall picture.
Picture Credit: lusi@stock.xchng
Email Article to Friend
Reader Comments (5)
I like your approach.
I am a skeptic for only a few reasons; 1. There is an 800 year delay between ancient temperature changes and the corresponding changes in CO2 concentrations. Therefore, by definition, changes in CO2 concentration are an 'effect' of climate change not a cause. A cause cannot follow by 800 years, only an effect can. 2. CO2 comprises only 1/28th of 1% of the atmosphere; there isn’t enough CO2 to deliver the devastating changes in climate that are being claimed. However, water vapor is believed to deliver 90% of the earth’s greenhouse effect. Yet water vapor is being ignored. When was the last time you heard anyone speak about Cap&Trade for water vapor? 3. Climate science has never shown conclusively that CO2 drives the earth’s climate. They have shown unequivocally that the climate changes, but they have never shown that CO2 or humans are responsible. Images of melting glaciers are evidence of climate change only, not that CO2 is the cause. 4. The biggest promoters of AGW are the one who stand to make the most money. Al Gore is part owner of the Chicago Climate Exchange, and is attempting to control the new “.eco” internet domain. He stands to earn billions. And the UN will receive billions annually for services in the carbon industry. These are just a few reasons why I remain a skeptic.
Klem - I have heard all the arguments you put forth. Most of them are traceable back to disinformation distributed by big business.
The best place to find facts on climate change is the NASA website. http://climate.nasa.gov/keyIndicators/
And part of the reason that I'm skeptical of the skeptics is that they are funded in large part by those who stand to lose the most if there are changes. They readily advocate for those changes that will make them more money - look at all the utility companies suddenly jumping on the green energy bandwagon - but oppose any that will make the most difference.
Global Warming: Man or Myth - the Science of Climate Change
Historian of science, Naomi Oreskes of UC San Diego, states “Scientific knowledge is the intellectual and social consensus of affiliated experts based on the weight of available empirical evidence, and evaluated according to accepted methodologies. If we feel that a policy question deserves to be informed by scientific knowledge, then we have no choice but to ask, what is the consensus of experts on this matter.”
Climate change has been extensively researched and the overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree that the observed modern day global warming is unprecedented and is very likely caused by humans. Although there is little serious debate between climate experts, many in the general public still think that these scientists are unsure about climate change and the role that humans have played in modern day global warming. The Website above summarizes some of the key research that has led scientists to their overwhelming consensus while also addressing some of the unfounded claims by climate change skeptics and denialists.
The only plausible explanation is that today's warming is primarily due to human activities. The increase in greenhouse emissions can easily account for this warming. There is robust evidence for the man-made global warming. There are no other known sources of warming that can explain the observed modern climate change. People that claim there is no warming or that the warming is not caused by humans have offered no credible alternate hypotheses. Yes, these folks make claims but none of the claims has stood up to scientific scrutiny. Because I see/hear much disinformation from well-intentioned folks, I feel it is my duty to try to educate people on this very important matter. Unfortunately, it is an uphill battle because most of the real science is discussed in hard-to-read scientific journals and most of the bad science is easily accessible on Web pages, blogs, and other forms of mass media. Worse, there are political organizations such as The Heartland Institute that present themselves as scientific organizations but these organizations are directly and indirectly funded by the fossil fuel industry and others that stand to lose if greenhouse gas emissions are reduced.
It is fine to be skeptical, but it is never fine to be a denialist. A skeptic is willing to hear both sides and is honest with his assessment of the information. A denialist blindly accepts everything that supports his opinion and immediately discards everything that does not. Carefully read my Global Warming site with an honest, open mind. Then weigh what I am discussing with what you have heard and where/who you have heard it from.
Scott,
I completely agree with you, and I thank you for linking to your site so that others are aware of it and can add it to their own reading lists. Part of the reason that I believe that the unprecedented global warming trend is man-made and linked to CO2 emissions is that I HAVE read carefully, applied due diligence to checking sources, and evaluated what I read and hear - and so far everything I read from deniers and skeptics is simplistic and falls apart on close examination. It does require an examination to see the fallacies, though - which is why I encourage people to read the criticisms of global warming and climate change theories carefully.