Image by Getty Images via @daylife
Sitting in on a March 1 Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) press conference regarding global warming and heavy snowfalls, I couldn’t help feeling like the chairman of the Senate committee questioning mafia capo Frank Pentangeli in Godfather II. The chairman, listening incredulously as Pentangeli contradicts a sworn written statement he had earlier given to the committee, waves the written statement in the air and protests, “We have a sworn affidavit — we have it — your sworn affidavit"¦. Do you deny that confession, and do you realize what will happen as a result of your denial?”
The UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Third Assessment Report was as straightforward as Frank Pentangeli’s earlier confession that he had killed on behalf of Michael Corleone. “Milder winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms,” IPCC reported.
That was in 2001. Now, however, with an unprecedented number of major winter snowstorms hitting the northeastern U.S. during the past two winters, the alarmists are clamming up and changing their tune faster than Tom Hagen can fly in Vincenzo Pentangeli from Italy to aid his brother in his time of trouble.
Jeff Masters, director of meteorology at the Weather Underground, and Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center, explained to the media at the UCS press conference why they believe global warming caused the heavy snowfalls in the northeast these past two winters. Masters and Serreze obviously are weather experts. They may be right. Other weather experts, such as John Coleman, co-founder of the Weather Channel, and Joseph D’Aleo, the first director of meteorology at the Weather Channel, disagree with Masters and Serreze. It is also possible that Coleman and D’Aleo are right.
During the question and answer portion of the UCS press conference, I quoted the IPCC Third Assessment Report and asked Masters and Serreze if they were saying IPCC was wrong on the science.
“I would say that we always learn,” replied Serreze. “Have we learned a great deal since the IPCC 2001 report? I would say yes, we have. Climate science, like any other field, is a constantly evolving field and we are always learning.”
While I believe the weight of scientific evidence favors Coleman and D’Aleo, the larger importance of the UCS press conference is not whether global warming causes "“ in effect "“ more winter, but what the press conference illustrated about the alarmists’ oft-repeated assertions that “the science is settled” and “the debate is over.”
The IPCC Third Assessment Report was as straightforward as one can get asserting that global warming would cause a decline in heavy snow events. As the Senate chairman would say, while waving the IPCC report, “We have it"¦.” But now that real-world evidence has proven IPCC wrong, the alarmists have pulled an about-face and are claiming global warming is causing more frequent heavy snow events.
Regardless of whether global warming is causing more heavy snow events, the alarmists’ about-face on snowfall calls to mind other alarmist global warming assertions that were supposedly “settled science”, but that were subsequently refuted by real-world climate conditions. The alarmists used to claim global warming was causing more hurricanes, but real-world data show hurricanes have fallen to historically lows levels.
The alarmists used to claim global warming was causing the retreat of Kilimanjaro’s mountain snowcap, but scientists now understand that local deforestation is the culprit. IPCC claimed in its 2007 assessment that global warming would likely melt the Himalayan glaciers by 2035, but IPCC now admits there is no scientific basis for such an assertion. IPCC claimed in its 1990 assessment that global temperatures should rise 0.6 degrees Celsius between 1990 and 2010, yet NASA satellite data show global temperatures warmed by merely half that amount, at most.
For years, alarmists have claimed “the science is settled” and “the debate is over.” Well, when was the science settled? When global warming would allegedly cause Himalayan glaciers to melt by 2035, or now that it won’t? When global warming would allegedly cause fewer heavy snow events, or now that it will allegedly cause more frequent heavy snow events?
We could ask Frank Pentangeli, but Frankie Five Angles is no longer talking.
James M. Taylor is senior fellow for environment policy at The Heartland Institute and managing editor of Environment & Climate News.
's Categories: 15740, 15741, 2334, byline=James Taylor
The deceased Climate Change mistake was a "do it or die climate CONTROL death threat". It meant saving the dying planet from CO2 by imposing lifestyle restrictions to billions of people with suffocating taxes. Obama didn't even mention this planetary emergency in his last state of the union speech. And what was the "scientists" response? Shouldn't the climatologists be all over the media? Oprha? CNN? PBS? The Republican majority cut the IPCC’s US funding on Feb. 20, 2011 and Carbon markets evaporated long ago. Funding for more research into CO2 effects have vanished and the NOAA declared “exaggeration” while the Weather Channel also bailed. There is now serious talk of criminal "treason" charges for this false war as the Republicans exploit a wave of former believer rage. Climate Control has done to Humanity's collective intelligence what witch burning and holocausts did to "civil" in "civilization". Meanwhile, the UN had allowed carbon trading to trump 3rd world fresh water relief, starvation rescue and 3rd world education for 25 years of climate control instead of needed population control. Respect for science, progressivism and journalism has joined the level of the Catholic Church's abusive priests. The harm it has done to environmental efforts can be corrected and regained, as does the resilient powers of Nature and the powers of the cosmos that dictate all life. Let's take care of the environment and enjoy life now with a costly lesson learned. We CAN evolve as civilized humans who no longer use fear as motivation.
The earth’s average temperature as calculated by climate science is 15C. For most of the past 600 million years the earth’s average temperature has been 22C. Is it a coincidence that 22C (72F) is the same temperature that we find most comfortable to set the household thermostat?
Wake up. We are in the middle of a series of ice ages. The idea that we are all going to die if the earth warms up a bit to where it has been for 600 million years is nonsense.
The IPCC says we need to worry about 2C warming. Well, if we all turn our thermostats down to 17C (63F), the same temperature the IPCC says is much too hot, I’m pretty sure most of us will be way too cold.
From Mr. Taylor’s Heartland Institute “About” page:
“Heartland’s mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. Such solutions include parental choice in education, choice and personal responsibility in health care, market-based approaches to environmental protection, privatization of public services, and deregulation in areas where property rights and markets do a better job than government bureaucracies.”
…Free Market Solutions?…. Market Based approaches to Environmental Protection? If we had listened to “Free Market” idiocies in California 30 years ago we would all be wearing gas masks in Southern California now! Luckily, environmental SCIENTISTS showed Oil companies how to lower exhaust emissions. How many lives were saved from cleaning up the air? How many more lives will be lost IF the Global CLIMATE change scientists are right? How much will it cost the world economy if they are right?
The polar icecaps ARE melting. Ice cold water has been flooding into the lower latitudes of the Pacific AND Atlantic – this HAS (yes snow storms) and will continue to change the climate through North America, Europe, Northern Asia and eventually the whole earth.
It’s one thing to have a Phd and cry “The sky is falling!” like you and others have accused the CLIMATE CHANGE scientists, but it’s another to claim a higher order of knowledge and clarity of thought while standing knee deep in ice water and selling lemonade to Tea Baggers that never graduated High School.
What is the price of ignoring the scientists? More than humanity can afford.
You have no idea how much the free market movement appreciates your vulgarity and bad manners.
It creates the proper contrast.
I now await the obligatory “Koch” reference.
Refreshing to see more people finally realizing that the Piled-higher&Deeper “Climate Change” scientists have all along been baselessly claiming “The sky is falling”.
Unfortunately, the aforementioned have been getting a free-ride via Taxpayer funding; while lowering the public’s respect for Science and trust of Scientists in general.
rpscott—– will continue to change the climate through North America, Europe, Northern Asia and eventually the whole earth. JK——Perhaps you didn't know: the climate has been continuously changing for millions of years. Even before SUVs and man's tiny amount of CO2
rpscott—– while standing knee deep in ice water and selling lemonade JK——Are you now trying to sell us that global warming causes global cooling and global warming and floods and droughts? Laughable.
rpscott—–What is the price of ignoring the scientists? More than humanity can afford. JK——What is the price of de-industrializing our society? How many MILLIONs will die? Give us the cost of the proposed solutions vs. the cost of doing nothing.
Any while you're at it: Please show us proof that man's CO2 is causing dangerous warming. Note that this is multi step proof.
Thanks JK
Mr. Taylor,
When people have said the science is "settled" they've largely been referring to the evidence that human activity "“ primarily burning fossil fuels and destroying forests "“ is overloading the atmosphere with carbon dioxide and changing the climate. You're creating a straw man when you try to apply the term "settled" to every aspect of climate change. The science indicating that gravity exists is similarly "settled." The fact that astronomers and cosmologists continue to study how gravity affects the movements of planets and galaxies does not somehow invalidate our basic understanding of gravity.
Burning fossil fuels and destroying forests continues to dump unprecedented amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and scientists continue to study the effects of doing so. I'm grateful for their work because they're helping us understand how climate change could impact our lives, our health and our economy.
While our two organizations certainly disagree about what to do about climate change, I would appreciate it if you refrained from misrepresenting scientists and their work.
Aaron Huertas Press Secretary Union of Concerned Scientists
“Burning fossil fuels and destroying forests continues to dump unprecedented amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere”
Human activity supplies 3% of the carbon dioxide dumped into the atmosphere each year. Nature supplies the other 97%.
The major source of climate change is land use. 100 years ago humans used just 4& of the land. Now we use 40%. Yes, we use almost 1/2 of all the land on the planet, as compared to 1/25 before the climate started to change.
Aaron Huertas: “Burning fossil fuels and destroying forests continues to dump unprecedented amounts of carbon dioxide into …”
Translation of UoCS’s “unprecedented amounts” – We don’t really want to state specifics because: a) specifics wouldn’t be scary (as in the Sky is Falling), b) specifics would go against Global Warmers claims (like thus far), so it is best to stay vague.
Aaron Huertas: “When people have said the science is "settled" they've largely been referring to the evidence …”
Your statement is invalid for multiple reasons: 1) Your statement is based on the assumption of itself being correct. A straw-man inside a straw-man argument. 2) The whole “settled” remark by pro-pundits of Global Warming was nothing more than 1st-strike propaganda. Akin to the school-yard cry of “I’m right, your wrong”. 3) Attempting to lend credence to the claims of Global Warming by tying it with factual “settled” science of “gravity” is NON-science. In fact it shows the outright desperation of the GW pro-pundit-propagandists.
[...] seeker401 posted about this interesting story. Here is a small section of the postOther weather experts, such as John Coleman, co-founder of the Weather Channel, and Joseph D’Aleo, the first director of meteorology at the Weather Channel, disagree with Masters and Serreze. …. How much will it cost the world economy if they are right? The polar icecaps ARE melting. Ice cold water has been flooding into the lower latitudes of the Pacific AND Atlantic "“ this HAS (yes snow storms) and will continue to change the climate through North America, Europe, … [...]
[...] MarketNewsVideo.com posted about this interesting story. Here is a small section of the post”Settled science” in the global warming camp is a moving target. [...]
There is no scientific debate that humans are overloading the atmosphere with too much carbon which is causing the planet to warm. Here is what the United States National Academy of Sciences says:
Read Full Article »