New climate change theories ignored
Studies of non-human causes of global warming remain on backburner
By: Paul Bowers
Posted: 10/15/07 - Pleading the fifth
Inflamed by the words of visionary preachers like Al Gore, some politicians and citizens have given up the objective pursuit of truth in favor of a powerful orthodoxy that mercilessly derides its heretics.
The issue at hand is global warming, and countless climatologists have jumped on the "Inconvenient Truth" bandwagon. Despite their best efforts, however, evidence continues to surface that climate change may be caused by - get this - weather.
The Oct. 2 issue of the New York Times included an article titled "Arctic Melt Unnerves the Experts" which described a drastic decrease in Arctic ice during the summer of 2007. The surprising part was the cause: through analysis of satellite images and weather schematics, NASA's jet propulsion laboratory determined that this sudden shift was primarily caused by abnormally warm winds from Siberia.
Other factors outlined in the article include cloud coverage and unusually sunny skies. If this sounds a lot like your evening weather report, that's because it is. Experts also point to long-term shifts including the periodic (and perfectly natural) phenomenon known as the Arctic Oscillation.
The northern ice cap is melting, polar bears are in danger, and it's not our fault. One would think this would create a stir among scientists and journalists. After all, the industrialized world is being let off the hook for endangering the planet's well-being. Shouldn't we be sharing a brief sigh of relief?
But the United Nations, and other organizations, are hell-bent on prolonging their international guilt trip.
Can we expect to hear much more about the NASA study? What about the fact that Antarctic ice levels have actually increased in recent years? Neither of these items have received more than cursory news coverage since Oct. 2, and it is doubtful they will.
This information may be explained by another powerful force featured in the New York Times. This effect, known as an "informational cascade," was described in an Oct. 9 article titled "Diet and Fat: A Severe Case of Mistaken Consensus."
The assertion of the article was that the harmful effects of fat intake have become grossly inflated over the past 50 years. Scientists, bureaucrats and citizens started with shaky evidence and as they expanded from theories to create the food pyramid and various diets, consensus on the topic snowballed. Thus, a cascade began.
Try questioning the human role in climate change in a room of college students, and just wait for someone to go for your throat.
A stance against the popularly accepted theory is a stance against self-righteous carbon cutbacks, pop culture and polar bears.
The Artic ice findings do not disprove human responsibility, but provide evidence to the contrary. Let's not brush them aside.