Wednesday, May 23, 2012
SunLive - The Bay's news first
Home >> Publications >> Letters to the Editor

Warming proven? I don't think so.

Share on Facebook   Follow Us on Facebook   Follow on Twitter
Email A Friend   Printer Friendly Page

 Interesting to note yet another letter of misinformation from Peter Otway relating to the myth of global warming (Letters, 17 Feb).

As Peter said in his presentation last year, he is not a scientist, he is simply reporting what scientists say.  As a non-scientist, I suppose he can be excused for failing to realise that science is not dependent on consensus.  If it were we would still believe that theearth was the centre of the universe and was also flat.  These were consensus beliefs until a few hundred years ago, when a very small number of scientists disproved them despite huge opposition from the establishment. Little, if anything, has changed.

The science behind the global warming myth is based on the frequently incorrect analysis of non-representative data combined with the fraudulent production of the infamous ’hockey stick’ graph, a scientific fraud exceeding that of the Piltdown Man early last century.  Based on this ’evidence’, the preposterously arrogant myth has been proposed that we are causing global warming by releasing carbon dioxide, a highly undesirable ’greenhouse’ gas which must be kept at low levels or the earth will overheat (even though water vapour is a far more effective greeenhouse gas than carbon dioxide). In fact the 375ppm concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide is one of the lowest there has ever been - it has been at least 25 times as high in the past without significant temperature change.  If it goes much lower plant growth will cease, then we will have problems. The 10,000 active volcanoes worldwide, most of them submarine, put out far more carbon dioxide per week than humans have ever produced.  And global temperatures have no relationship to carbon dioxide concentrations anyway; they correlate well with solar heat output and solar flares, over which we have absolutely no control.

We are currently at the end of an interglacial period that has lasted for 15,000 years, approximately 50% longer than previous average interglacials.  At this point in the past four interglacials (and probably for the other >20 that have occurred in the past few million years) the temperature has dropped rapidly - over years or decades, not centuries - sending the earth into a glacial period lasting about 80,000 years.  During the last glacial period, with an average temperature drop of around 5 deg C, the sea level dropped 100m or more due to the accumulation of glacial ice on land.

This will be the first glacial that so-called civilised humans have experienced - it should be interesting (from scientiific and sociological viewpoints) to see how we cope.

 

Alan Willoughby

MSc Earth Science

Welcome Bay




Comments

Pollution

Posted on 26-02-2012 14:18 | By awilloughby

I totally agree with both the above comments. We live in the real world, not a lab, and we cannot continue to pollute the air, water (both fresh and ocean) and the land with our toxic rubbish. It is for these reasons, and not for the reason that the earth will heat up, that we need to seriously curb our current energy use and waste making processes. Earth will survive quite happily no matter what we do - the big question is will we continue to survive? Most current practices appear to revolve around money - what will it take before people realise that we cannot eat, breathe or drink money? Alan

Warming proven?.

Posted on 24-02-2012 15:23 | By algail

Hear hear and congratulations to the editor for allowing such a posting. “ The only qualification you need is to live in the real world not in some laboratory “ This quote shows that people cannot see the wood for the trees. Most of the data presented by the warmest is “ from a lab “ The anti warmists mostly, if not all work from a pure science view rather than a flawed science view. Alastair Bethlehem

Who knows what the truth is ?

Posted on 24-02-2012 09:27 | By Scambuster

However if we keep chucking all the worlds noxious rubbish into the air it cannot be good for us and you don’t have to be a scientist to work that out .The only qualification you need is to live in the real world not in some laboratory.If we stop doing it then there will not be any downside will there ? Can the scientific community accept and agree with that premise ?

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to make a comment.
Most Viewed
Most Commented
©2012 Sun Media Ltd - All Rights Reserved
Sun Media