Climate Change: Science versus Politics
For centuries, human beings, inquisitive by disposition and design, have sought to understand the workings of the natural world in which they live. Scientists, observing these same events, are driven by the demands of scientific inquiry to study natural events and explain how they occur so that this knowledge can be used to improve the human condition.
To begin the process of scientific investigation, scientists make an “educated guess,” or hypothesis, to explain the observed activity. It is, however, not sufficient to propose the explanation without proving its accuracy. An experiment must be carefully designed so that the results will either support or disprove the truth of the “educated guess.” As the experiment proceeds, data is collected, analyzed, and conclusions are reached in an orderly process.
Critical and essential steps to the scientific method include verification that the experimental process was conducted objectively, and the overall outcome must be derived from unbiased analysis of the raw data, free from prejudicial influence. Upon completion of the experiment, the raw data must be available for scrutiny by all, and other scientists must be able to reproduce the process and conclude the same result.
Initially, “global warming” was the term used for human induced increases in Earth’s temperature. When it became common knowledge to the rest of the world that plant Earth warmed and cooled in cycles, it wasn’t long before global warming enthusiasts found themselves defending their position. Behind closed doors, a new name was conceived, and, today, the human race faces the same theory under a different name, “climate change.”
Because of the political and biological implications of climate change, the actual degree of danger it poses to Earth and its inhabitants should be discussed and debated openly so that evidence can be candidly reviewed and rational action can be taken. Unfortunately, personal and national agendas inhibit the possibility of having any rational discussion.
The statement, “Climate change is caused by human activity,” assumes the hypothesis from which it was derived is “settled science.”
There are two distinct aspects to the climate change issue; scientific truths and political agendas.
Perhaps at the top of the list of declared “settled science” is the threat of melting glaciers, primarily due to human carbon emissions. For many years, NASA scientists, and others, have been studying glacier mass and melt. With each report, comes news of ever-decreasing glaciers and rising sea levels.
Governments, media, scientific institutions, universities, and other climate change special interest groups, encouraged by the bad news, quickly write their own articles and reports taking artistic license with science to make a few “improvements.”
The Union of Concerned Scientists, a 501(c)(3) non-profit: Global Warming is the primary cause of current sea level rise: Human activities, such as burning coal and oil and cutting down tropical forests, have increased atmospheric concentrations of heat-trapping gases and caused the planet to warm by 1.4 degrees Fahrenheit since 1880.
Earth Observatory: Global warming is the unusually rapid increase in Earth’s average surface temperature over the past century primarily due to the greenhouse gases released as people burn fossil fuels.
CBC News/Science and Technology: With human-caused climate change, we puny creatures are having some powerful effects on our entire planet, including one you might not imagine was possible — making it spin more slowly. The melting of glaciers near the Earth’s poles and the resulting rise in sea level is slowing down the Earth’s rotation and making each day a little longer, a new study confirms. . . . They found glacier melt due to climate change since the industrial revolution has caused the Earth to slow down exactly as they had predicted.
In 2008, scientists from the British Antarctic Survey discovered the first volcanic eruptions beneath the fastest melting ice sheet, west Antarctic glaciers.
We believe this was the biggest eruption in Antarctica during the last 10,000 years. It blew a substantial hole in the ice sheet, and generated a plume of ash and gas that rose around 12 km into air. ~Hugh Orr, Lead Author (BAS)
The flow of this glacier towards the coast has speeded up in recent decades and it may be possible that heat from the volcano has caused some of that acceleration. ~ David Vaughan, Co-Author (BAS)
In 2015, researcher Maya Tolstoy published a paper in Geophysical Researchers on volcanic eruptions taking place beneath glaciers, in which she found underwater volcanic activity could significantly impact global carbon emissions. Tolstoy found that that volcanic pulsing caused the flow of greenhouse gases to fluctuate when CO2 is released into the ocean and eventually vents into the atmosphere.
It appears Earth’s glaciers are, indeed, melting, but the reason, very likely, has very little to do with human activity and everything to do with underwater thermogenic activity.
In 2009, shocking revelations proved that climate science is suspect at best and fake at worst. With the whistle-blower release of thousands of emails from the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, leading climate change scientists were shown to have been deliberately manipulating raw data and falsifying records for years to support the theory of “human-induced” global warming. Leaked emails further showed collusion with government officials (DailyMail.co.uk 2011):
I cannot overstate the HUGE amount of political interest in the project as a message that the government can give on climate change to help them tell their story. ~Humphrys, Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Any work we have done in the past is done on the back of the research grants we get – and has to be well hidden. I’ve discussed this with the main funder (U.S. Dept of Energy) in the past and they are happy about not releasing the original station data. ~ Professor Phil Jones, Director – Climatic Research Unit
I’ve been told that Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is above national Freedom of Information Acts. ~ Professor Phil Jones, Director – Climatic Research Unit
One way to cover yourself and all those working in AR5 would be to delete all emails at the end of the process. ~ Professor Phil Jones, Director – Climatic Research Unit
These same scientists, heavily involved with the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, have been the driving force behind global warming for years.
The science of climate change was not “settled.” There was no consensus about the extent and causes of global warming; in their private emails, the scientists expressed serious doubts and disagreements on some major issues. Steven Hayword, Weekly Standard (2011)
Like many governments in developed nations, the US funds a litany of research programs. According to the National Association of Policy Analysis (2013), the federal government requires government-funded scientists associated with the US Global Change Research Program to carry out a National Climate Assessment every four years. The US Global Change Research Program receives billions of dollars annually from the government, compliments of hard-working US tax payers. These scientists are, essentially, tasked with research that will conclude with a result that either ensures or eliminates their jobs. A conflict of interest?
The global recording of temperatures and sea levels began at the end of the nineteenth century. Prior to 1890, it is only through historical writings that those measurements can be inferred. During the Medieval Warm Period, global temperatures are believed to have been somewhat higher than today.
Archaeological evidence confirms the presence of Viking farming settlements in Greenland, that is now covered by an average of 2.5 kilometers of ice. There also are written accounts of vineyards at that time in areas of Europe where grapes cannot be grown today.
Most geologists agree that the Medieval Warm Period was followed by the Little Ice Age that ended about 1890. As might be expected, the ending of the Little Ice Age was followed by a period of gradual warming that has generally continued up into our current time.
Robert Kappelmann, principal energy and environmental policy consultant with RLK Associates, said, “Geologic evidence that nearly all scientist agree upon is that we are in an interglacial period and have experienced a wonderful warming for the last 25,000 years that has given rise to human civilization. In other words, Mother Nature has been responsible for at least 25,000 years of climate change . . . but this time we are to believe the changes are human-induced.”
It is prudent to note here that additional emails were leaked in 2011 related to the falsification of climate change data at the Climatic Research Unit. Professor Phil Jones, one of the scientists at the center of corruption, was part of a group of scientists behind promotion of the “hockey stick graph” graph developed by Michael Mann and others in 1998.
The graph depicts global temperatures from 1000 AD to present. For the first 900 years the temperature remains relatively unchanged. At about 1920, the temperature shoots up, pauses around 1970, and then continues to rise. According to the graph 1,000 years of declining temperatures were followed by soaring temperatures that reach the highest level in recorded history.
The graph also effectively eliminates the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age. Since these periods contradict the theory of global warming, the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was happy to incorporate the graph as a cornerstone for global warming.
In 1998, two Canadian professors, Ross McKitrick and Steve McIntyre, attempted to reproduce the hockey stick graph and found, “The data set of proxies of past climate used in Mann, Bradley and Hughes for the estimation of temperatures from 1400 to 1980 contains collation errors, unjustifiable truncation or extrapolation of source data, obsolete data, geographical location errors, incorrect calculation of principal components and other quality control defects. ”
The professors then applied the correct data source using the same methodology published by the original authors of the graph. Results using the correct data source revealed that 15th century temperatures were higher than any temperature in the 20th century. (McIntyre, S. Mckitrick, R. 1998. Corrections to the Mann et. al. (1998) Proxy Data Base and Northern Hemispheric Average Temperature Series. Energy & Environment, Vol 14, (Issue 6), 751-771. doi: 10.1260/095830503322793632).
In 2004, Mckitrick published “What is the ‘Hockey Stick’ debate about?”
As soon as the IPCC Report came out, the hockey stick version of climate history became canonical.
Suddenly it was the “consensus” view, and for the next few years it seemed that anyone publicly
questioning the result was in for a ferocious reception. ~ Ross Mckitrick (University of Guelph. 2005)
A quotation erroneously attributed to both Mark Twain and Benjamin Disraeli states, “There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.” Any set of numbers can be manipulated to prove a desired hypothesis if arranged and evaluated to serve that purpose. This is accomplished by setting the variables to include or exclude facts at the will of the hypothesizer.
When hard data is available, it can be “corrected” by selecting appropriate variables. It is even easier when direct data is not available. An historical time line can be created by including only those events that produce the predicted and desired result. The effect becomes even more pronounced if cause and effect is inferred but not proven by a direct correlation of data sets. It may be a valid statement to say that that 99% of all cocaine addicts drank milk as babies. It would not be valid to use that data to claim that milk is a gateway drug to cocaine addiction.
The Climate Change War is further complicated its metamorphosis into a modern-day religion with all the components of traditional and more ancient belief systems but a style more consistent with televangelism. Carbon Dioxide is the Satan of climate change religion, even though Earth is a “carbon planet” and carbon dioxide, a byproduct of animal metabolism, is essential for the existence of all plant life. The high priests of “Climate Change” travel in limousines and private jets, leaving carbon footprints that far exceed the rest of us.
Moreover, a study of these climate change “high priests’s” financial investments reveals that they stand to gain financially from the Cap and Trade schemes that will relegate the rest of us back to a Stone Age existence. Climate change “deniers” are called sinners and are the subject of vicious character assassinations. The high priests create a constant hysteria by blaming every weather event on climate change and proclaim that Earth can only be saved by our accepting their prescribed solutions from which they, of course, are exempt.
We’ve heard it before . . . “Socialism is for the people, not the socialists.”
Strict adherence to the scientific method over past centuries has led to the amazing discoveries that enrich human existence today. To be valid, scientific study must remain pure and uninfluenced by the agendas and beliefs of government and religion. Galileo, for example, was charged with heresy because he proved and promoted the ideas of Copernicus that the Earth and planets orbited the sun. It was the belief of the church that all heavenly bodies revolved around the Earth.
Dr. Dan’s guest on Freedom Forum Radio this weekend is Robert Kappelmann PE. Kappelmann is the principal energy and environmental policy consultant with RLK Associates. Prior to entering the consulting field, he served as Director of Legislative and Regulatory Affairs at JEA (Formally the Jacksonville Electric Authority). He has assisted clients in understanding the economic impacts of new energy and environmental legislative and regulatory initiatives on their utility operations.
Kappelmann received a Bachelor of Science degree from Stetson University and completed undergraduate requirements in Chemical and Civil engineering and received a Master degree in Environmental Engineering from the University of Florida. His graduate research area was in Atmospheric Photochemistry.
Kappelmann is a registered professional engineer in the state of Florida. He is married and has two children (see Complete Biography).
“If we are already experiencing all the disasters attributed to anthropogenic carbon dioxide outlined in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as evidence of human caused climate change, what in the world do we have to look forward to when the temperature climbs best case scenario . . . another 2°C?” ~Robert Kappelmann
Part one of this four-part interview begins this weekend, Saturday and Sunday, November 11-12, on WJRB 95.1 FM and streamed live over the Internet. Part two airs Saturday and Sunday, November 18-19, part three airs Saturday and Sunday, November 25-26, and part four airs Saturday and Sunday, December 2-3. All programs are available by podcast following air time here.
