The subject of Climate Change and Global Warming has a polarizing effect in the U.S. Like religion, you either believe or don’t believe. Strong sentiments resonate on both sides. It seems impossible to try to sway either camp.
One of the biggest excuses used by anthropogenic climate change and global warming skeptics has been the unscrupulous nature of the scientific community. In a poll I conducted a few years ago titled “Climate Change – Fact or Fiction,” about 40% of 478 pages of comments raised concern over Climategate, scientists, financial gains and the political arena. Comments included:
“Unfortunately, there are so-called ‘scientists’ in someone’s financial pocket that are not credible, either.”
“Global warming is a hoax in the grand tradition of big, scary problems that all require huge expensive solutions and tend to empower the establishment. To understand global warming, you don’t need to study science; you need to study history and politics.
“What remains scientifically untenable is the manner in which global temperature data is massaged to try to show upward trends where the trend is either neutral or downward.”
“You have a few who claim to understand the heart of the issue and hold the answers that can’t be shared (Climate scientists and priests).”
“The evidence (global warming) has been documented, but not in an ethical manner. Emails clearly show a desire to prevent certain scientists (with opposing views) from obtaining raw data, and then to destroy the data when it was apparent that hiding the data would not last much longer. To simply ignore logical arguments based on, “We’ve already decided we’re right, and we won’t listen to your arguments.” is the epitome of intellectual arrogance and hypocrisy.”
“The more I learn about so-called climate change, the less confidence I have in the “science”. Seems like it is one more scam to sell books, make money, protect grants and so on. The evidence seems to suggest that the Planet has actually been cooling for the past decade. The fact that these “Scientists” tried to cover up data that did not support their theory is highly damaging to their case.”
For whatever reason, the winds seem to be shifting in favor of the reality of climate change. Earlier this week headlines throughout the country rang with the tune “Earth is Warming, Scientist and Former Skeptic Says.”
Seth Borenstein of the Huffington Post reports:
“….. he (Richard Muller, a prominent physicist and skeptic of global warming) determined they (climate scientists) were right: Temperatures really are rising rapidly.”
“….. study of the world’s surface temperatures by was partially bankrolled by a foundation connected to global warming deniers.”
“….. he found that the land is 1.6 degrees warmer than in the 1950s. Those numbers from Muller, who works at the University of California, Berkeley and Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, match those by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and NASA.”
“….. we have confidence that the temperature rise that had previously been reported had been done without bias.”
In closing, to the extent that more believe in climate change, a remark in the article sets a somber tone to the difficulties that lie ahead; “Some of the most noted scientific skeptics are no longer saying the world isn’t warming. Instead, they question how much of it is man-made, view it as less a threat and argue it’s too expensive to do something about.”
While we cannot turn our clocks back, except for the hour loss on daylight savings time, we can start today in earnest. All America needs is a supportive and effective energy policy!
By. Dr. Barry Stevens
Dr. Barry Stevens has over 25 years of proven international experience building technology-driven enterprises and bringing superior products and services to market ahead of the competition. He is the founder of TBD America Inc., a technology business development group. In this role, he is responsible for monetizing technologies and leading globally-competitive companies to higher levels of revenue, earnings, and growth. Please visit TBD's website at http://www.tbdamericainc.com and his blog at http://barryonenergy.wordpress.com
Meanwhile, I would suggest that at the very least, skeptics contradict what is said by the IPCC, Al Gore, and others who push the idea that human activity drives global warming. Readers here need not trust me on what I say, they can certainly judge for themselves whether or not such skeptics "have yet to provide any significant scientific contributions to the topic", when they check out "Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the NONgovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC)" and the related 2011 Interim Report, seen here: http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2009/2009report.html and here http://www.nipccreport.org/reports/2011/2011report.html )
Notice the fundamental difference between myself and commenter "MarkusR". One of us wants readers to make their own informed decision from what they see in both sides of the issue, and the other wants them to ignore half of the story based on an unsupported assertion. Does anyone see the problem there?
Expert credibility in climate change
William R. L. Anderegga,1, James W. Prallb, Jacob Haroldc, and Stephen H. Schneidera