Weather Underground
March 26th, 2007 at 8:23 pm
Hard to believe, but a debate on global warming took place at the Capitol today. Too bad it wasn’t somewhere like the House floor or a committee hearing. Instead, tucked away, in the deepest bowels of the Capitol Extension, four respected climate researchers from such liberal hotbeds as Texas Tech and Texas A&M Universities gave a legislative briefing on the subject. Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy non-profit, hosted the event, and it looked like lawmakers sent mostly young staffers, equipped with telltale yellow legal notepads.
Referencing the conclusions of the recent IPCC report, the panel reaffirmed that global warming is happening. The only debate left is over how hot it will get. That’s not a startling conclusion for anyone who’s given the topic passing attention lately, but the difficulties of demonstrating global warming’s existence also complicate policy.
“You don’t see climate change in individual years or individual events; you see it in the course of years or decades,” said state climatologist and A&M professor, Dr. John Nielsen-Gammon. At the same time, that means global warming policy must look decades into the future, a consideration usually given to only the most lucrative toll road projects. What we do today will have a real impact on what happens in 2100.
Complicating matters, as Dr. Eric Barron, dean of the geosciences school at UT-Austin, put it, “You’re going to have to live with a certain amount of uncertainty.” Data collected from multiple information sources across the globe, taken in aggregate, may overwhelming demonstrate that things are warming at an unnatural rate. But scientists freely admit that the best they can do is estimate how warm the planet will get, or how fast, or what will be the precise environmental impact, or how exactly it will affect humans.
Unfortunately, politicians are not known for championing long-term preventive measures, most of whose effects won’t be realized in their lifetimes. But something’s got to be done. Some options are obvious, such as any measure that reduces CO2 emissions. (This might be a good place for Texas to start, considering we rank 7th in the world.) Others require a broader view. For instance, Dr. Barron suggested that is it in our country’s interest to develop clean coal technologies and to give away those technologies. Even if the United States totally abandoned coal power, China will surely not, and it will use whatever process is cheapest. There will also be the need for social policies, similar to insurance policies to handle the expected increase in droughts and floods.
In the end, though, it was clear that the scientists are weary of the endless political debate over the existence of global warming. Dr. Gerald North, a respected professor of geosciences, said to watch how global warming skeptics now go about their harangues on TV.
“Ten years ago they used to do it by arguing some aspect of the science,” North said. “More and more the arguments depend on ‘These people are dependent on their (research) money.’ … Those arguments are not valid arguments.”
March 27th, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Dear Mr. Wright,
I have been studying the Global Warming hysteria for years and after all I have been able to glean, there are several key factors that are NEVER discussed in the Global Warming debate. First off do see the recent BBC video, The Great Global Warming Swindle, I believe Google Video has it. This documents the fraud and junk science behind Al Gores ridiculous movie and claims. Seccondly, water vapour is the most important GHG and Co2 is heavier than the Oxygen/Nitrogen air mix that constitutes the troposphere where weather happens. Also CFC’c are heavy and these gasses purported to be the cause of Global Warming and Ozone depletion, are all in fact to heavy to reach above the troposphere where they are claimed to do so much trouble making.
Third, there is the very real and insideous use of Chemtrails, what is called persistant contrails from airliners…is infact also a deception, look up “Artificial Clouds” New Ruskin Institute, University of Alaska. he diliberate injection of millions of tonns of particalized aluminum oxide and other metal oxides to force artificial clouds for weather modification, artificial clouds that trap heat to the lower atmosphere, a diliberate act assaulting nature itself. Lastly, HAARP, also located at University of Alaska..this project employs an antenea array of some six hundred antenea that broadcasts Millions of watts worth of directed energy microwave freaquency modulations targeting areas of the Ionisphere, this is called an Ionisphere Heater. This is the most horrifying and likely cause of super storms such as Katrina, as well as other Global Warming” events, heat waves, droughts, floods..etc…
Sir, the Sun has more to do with driving climate than anything else on earth. Volcanism ejects 90% more Green House Gasses into the atmosphere than all of humanities activities combined….in all our history combined. We are being lied to, And our atmosphere is being injured deliberately by mad scientists and the governments and corporations who fund them. Don’t take my word for it. Just google or yahoo search these topics and see what you see. As for my ground observations, I see Chemtrails whenever Cirrus clouds are arround….
Sincerely, George NaytowhowCOn
April 13th, 2007 at 1:40 pm
[…] our previous posts on environmental issues. Or skip straight to the global warming good stuff: the debate; vehicle emissions and the terror of Dennis Bonnen; Houston and air pollution; TXU; and, of course, […]