(Why) Al Gore is Always Right

Global Cooling presents humankind with the most important social, political, and adaptive challenge we have had to deal with for ten thousand years. Your stake in the decisions we make concerning it is of ultimate importance; the survival of ourselves, our children, our species".  The Cooling: Has The Next Ice Age Already Begun?, Prentice-Hall 1975.

It is fairly safe scientifically to state that our planet will someday experience another Ice Age.  Geology and climatology tell us that the third rock has already experienced at least four major freeze-ups. In fact, our current climate is actually the tail end of the last Ice Age.(1) 


In 1976, the year I was born, a scientific consensus was reached that the earth stood on the edge of environmental calamity; the possibility of an abrupt descent into a new Ice Age.  30 years of data showed that the earth was cooling much more rapidly than it had at any time in measured history.  Yet by 1977, the data showed that the cooling had stopped, and by the time I was in High School the consensus had firmly shifted to that of anthropogenic global warming that now threatened humanity in the same way that the impending Ice Age did 15 years prior.


Over the next 15 or so years, the bulk of society gradually accepted that human produced carbon dioxide is amplifying the greenhouse effect and hastening the warming of our planet. The theory of human-carbon induced climate change is now nearly universally believed to be true.  At the very least, it has become accepted.


After many years of failed attempts and contemplation on how to debate and present this issue, I had simply given up.  There exists an impenetrable armor of passion and fervor around this issue that has absorbed it into the very fabric of our culture.  This is especially true of people my age and younger -- those who have never experienced a world with any other possibility but an impending man-made climate catastrophe.  To suggest that the current model is incorrect is to subject oneself to ridicule, disgust and scorn.


So rather than continue to waste my efforts on discussing the issue with people who are not equipped to do so, I have decided to simply emphasize the ease with which scientifically-based doubt can be formed.  I do not seek to prove that anthropogenic climate change does not exist; only to demonstrate that the accepted understanding of it is an error of epic cart-before-the-horse proportions with ghastly economic consequences.


So, let's consider some questions:


Why, when we look at a chart of rising CO2 levels and temperatures why do we assume that the rising CO2 caused the temperature increase?   


What if the effectiveness of CO2 as a greenhouse gas was non-linear and did not lend itself to a runaway greenhouse model? 


What if increased CO2 in the atmosphere resulted in a more favorable environment for plant growth, offsetting CO2's effectiveness as a greenhouse gas? 

Do we really know the answers to these questions?  No.  And it turns out we are no more certain that CO2 is causing our climate to change more than it would normally.   Regardless, the leaders of this cause chose to beatify the anthropogenic CO2 model into truth, and to create a "system" to combat it with great effectiveness.  So effective, in fact, that even in the face of failure it succeeds.


Consider these questions:

What is going to happen over the next few decades if the temperature and CO2 levels begin to decrease?  Will we hear claims that our efforts to solve the crisis were successful, that things like new laws and regulations, "cap and trade" and carbon credits stopped the warming trend and saved us from calamity?

Of course we will.

What will happen if temperature and CO2 plateau and remain the same in coming decades?  Will we hear similar claims of success; that our actions stopped the rise in temperatures?

Of course we will.

What will happen over the next few decades if the temperature and CO2 levels continue to rise?  Will we hear claims that we have not done enough, and that we need to commit more of our resources to cutting carbon emissions so that we can slow the warming trend?

Of course we will.

See, with the assumption that CO2 is to blame, it is self-fulfilling no matter what the result, and it is a win-win-win for those who believe in it and those who directly benefit from it.  This sickening cycle of manipulation is perpetuated by a combination of zealous citizens, scientists and politicians, and by the businesses and individuals that profit from its existence.  CO2-warming science made the jump from theoretical computer models straight to consensus, yet we wager trillions of dollars and increased government regulation and bureaucracy on it.  And as long as trillions of dollars hedge on the CO2 supposition being true, it does not matter what the climate does.  Down, up , or plateaued, the doomsdayers who brought this climate hysteria upon us will continue to interpret the data in ways that fulfill the prophecy.  Don't believe me...?

Al Gore, the forefather of the post-cooling climate change club, had this to say when asked how to motivate people to solve climate change:

...denial [of anthropogenic/CO2-based climate change] is an enormous obstacle to any discussion of solutions. Nobody is interested in solutions if they don't think there's a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over-representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.  Over time that mix will change. As the country comes to more accept the reality of the crisis, there's going to be much more receptivity to a full-blown discussion of the solution. From, "An Interview with Accidental Movie Star Al Gore", http://www.grist.org/article/roberts2/, May 2006.

In other words, as people become more and more accepting of this theory they will also be more supportive of the funding to "solve" the problem regardless of whether or not the solution is viable, or the problem actually exists.   People like Al Gore will continue to receive awards and accolades, mostly because they can not be wrong.



Being the quasi-religion that it is, I am all but accused of heresy when I dispute the validity of the anthropogenic/CO2 model of climate change.  People question how a seemingly intelligent person can not believe such a "widely accepted scientific consensus".   However, I would wager that I have studied and striven to understand this issue more than 99% of those who simply "believe".  The surprising fact to many is that I do believe in climate change. To think otherwise would be completely absurd! As sure as the sun rises, I can state with scientific certainty that my house will be buried under thousands of feet of ice sometime in the relatively near future.


But I also believe that the modern institution of anthropogenic climate change is a man-made prophecy that has cost taxpayers trillions of dollars, hurt businesses, and exacted an immeasurable waste of time, energy and worry on society.   I mean really...in the long run, how many more years are we allegedly shaving off of this interglacial period if we start complying with the demands of this movement?  If we are concerned about the survival of our species, perhaps we should be looking to bolster global warming...maybe we can buy a few more years in this interglacial period before the next ice age, assuming we aren't wiped out by a metor, plague, or by our own actions. 



We have allowed the "boy who cried wolf" scenario to play out twice over the past 30 years, and I guarantee that when the next interglacial cooling period begins (which may be starting now) the dogma, and thereby all of the associated socioeconomic implications, will shift with it.  The machine will continue to feed on the rich mix of fear and zeal to fuel itself.

This is as much about common sense as it is about good policies built on good science.   Unfortunately, all three seem to be in very short supply since that first doomsday prediction 30 years ago.  The real crisis in climate change is that humanity has been bamboozled and misled.  And unfortunately, since the rules of the game change during play, time will not tell.   Al Gore has never been more right.



--


1. An Ice Age.  http://www.amnh.org/science/biodiversity/extinction/Intro/Iceage.html