Friday, April 21, 2006

Duke Pokes an Ozone Hole in Global Warming

What is it today? Liberal papers, liberal colleges, all on our side in reports. Have they gone mad?

The latest fun today is a study by Duke University physics professors, that at least partially debunks the politicized "global warming" juggernaut:
At least 10 to 30 percent of global warming measured during the past two decades may be due to increased solar output rather than factors such as increased heat-absorbing carbon dioxide gas released by various human activities, two Duke University physicists report.
This research built on studies originating in Columbia University that suggested the role of solar output in charting global warming theories had been underestimated, leading to a rash of alarming conclusions. No one is ready to give up the "global warming" ghost just yet, but these new data inject some needed science into the discussion.
This study does not discount that human-linked greenhouse gases contribute to global warming, they stressed. "Those gases would still give a contribution, but not so strong as was thought," Scafetta [one of the researchers] said.

"We don't know what the Sun will do in the future," Scafetta added. "For now, if our analysis is correct, I think it is important to correct the climate models so that they include reliable sensitivity to solar activity. "Once that is done, then it will be possible to better understand what has happened during the past hundred years."
Which has been our whole point in HazZzMat all along. 10-20 years is not much time in the history of the cosmos. When it comes to things like climate modeling, focusing on 100 year intervals or longer demonstrably makes more sense, and gives a clearer picture of overall developing climate trends, if any.

(BTW, hope these guys are tenured, or they are doomed. At the very least, there'll be no Nobels for these researchers.)

The Washington Times offered further insight into—and backing for—this study:
Supported by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation, the Duke researchers noted that some observational studies predicted that the Earth's temperature could rise as much as 16 degrees in this century because of an increase in carbon dioxide or other so-called greenhouse gases.

The Duke estimates show the chances that the planet's temperature will rise even by 11 degrees is only 5 percent, which falls in line with previous, less-alarming predictions that meteorologists made almost three decades ago.
Of course, this doesn't prevent the usual observations by politicized and, no doubt, "peer reviewed" moonbat scientists elsewhere:
This month, a University of Toronto scientist predicted that a quarter of the planet's plants and animals would be extinct by 2050 because of rising temperatures. On Wednesday, two geophysics professors at the University of Chicago warned those who eat red meat that their increased flatulence contributes to greenhouse gases.
Had to get that vegan sales pitch in there, didn't we, University of Chicago?

And then there's that American hero and inventor of the Internet, Al Gore:
The topic of global warming, meanwhile, will be framed dramatically in "An Inconvenient Truth," a 94-minute documentary featuring former Vice President Al Gore, who has deemed rising temperatures "a planetary emergency." The Hollywood production will be released to theaters in May and is billed by producer Davis Guggenheim as "the most terrifying film you will ever see."
More terrifying, even, than "Triumph of the Will," no doubt. One wonders whether part of the problem the contemporary left has when it comes to recognizing terrorism is that they daily terrorize themselves and others so thoroughly that they can no longer recognize real terrorism when it occurs. Note also the use of the word "Truth" in the title of the Gore propaganda fest. This is a transparent old Stalinist tactic that we're onto here in HazZzMat. Incessantly declaring something that's unproven to be the "truth" does not make it so. Which we will happily point out each and every time the hard left attempts this cheap trick.

In the meantime, with the price of gas lately, this may all prove to be a moot point. At the current per-barrel rate of increase in oil prices, we'll all be riding bicycles before the end of the year anyway.

1 comment:

Scott Hinrichs said...

Are the researchers at the University of Chicago insinuating that vegans don't pass gas? Do they have any empirical evidence to back this up? Now there's a study that sounds worth taxpayer funding. I'd love to see one of these PhDs trying to explain his/her thesis and data gathering methods to a group of taxpayers.