Ran across this interesting article the other day. Miklós Zágoni, a Hungarian scientist working for NASA, was reviewing some basic equations used in global warming modelling, first derived by by Arthur Milne in 1922, and he noticed that Milne simplified his terms by assuming that the atmosphere was infinitely thick.
When he plugged in the correct term for the thickness of the atmosphere, he found that climate seemed to self-regulate, preventing runaway warming.
His paper appeared in a peer-reviewed journal in Hungary, so I’m assuming it’s not obviously bullshit, and it reinforces my skepticism about the whole global warming thing. The temperature has varied throughout, say, the last 15,000 years, and without huge ecological disasters of the type predicted by warming alarmists. I just think we don’t have a deep enough understanding of the science involved to be making policy decisions such as cutting emissions by 90%, as some have called for.
I’m always in favor of economizing, but more for aesthetic reasons than practical ones. I just don’t like waste.
Also, I love the fact that the original researched was named “Arthur Milne”. Just seems like he should be A. A. Milne’s brother. I wonder what Eeyore would say about global warming. “Oh, well. If things weren’t getting warmer, I suppose they’d be getting colder.”
I imagine Winnie would say, “Oh, bother. What we need is some honey.”
But science evolves and advances, in fits and starts perhaps, but we learn & progress. In ancient times, we “knew” the earth was flat. One hundred years ago, we “knew” that Mars was criss-crossed with water filled canals. In the 1970′s, we “knew” that another ice age was just around the corner.
Imagine what we’ll know tomorrow.
There are a whole bunch of things tied up in this whole global warming thing. One is whether or not we are in a warming trend. Another is whether or not this is caused by human activity. Another is whether or not this means Teh End of teh World!!!!1!
IF we’re in a warming trend (I think it likely we are), odds are high (very, very high) that it is a natural phenomenon, because we know it has happened before, many many times. Occam’s Razor applies here: if it has happened before without human cause, there is no need to postulate human cause.
And if we could somehow determine that it is caused by human intervention, we then have to draw conclusions based on climate models when we can’t even predict the weather two weeks out. Hell, even the end of the 7 day prediction is seldom correct. The furthest out I can trust it is about 3 or 4, and that during periods of stable weather.
BUT I don’t think this alarmism is a bad thing. Really, I don’t. Because it pushes people toward conservation, and drives innovation. We are in a period where the end of fossil fuel is in sight, and we will have to find newer, better methods of doing things.
Which we will. We are now. For $20, I can buy a little globe on a stick. Put it in the ground, and a solar cell the size of a credit card charges a battery during the day, and the little globe glows all night. It isn’t much of a stretch from that to houses with solar cells powering interior lighting.
[...] follow-up to my recent global warming post: apparently, an army of robots deployed throughout the world’s oceans have begun reporting [...]