Climate Science Disagreement

Not all scientists think human-generated CO2 is a problem. 

The science of climatology has become utterly fouled by politics, self-interest, willful blindness, and group-think.

Democrats outside of fossil fuel states don't dare openly question the "inconvenient truth" that human-caused CO2 is damaging the planet. Most Republicans have moved to an opposite, climate-skeptical position. For Republican officeholders, either CO2 is not an imminent problem, or at least there is nothing Americans could do that would change anything. So don't bother.

Climate change skeptics cite facts that are a "convenient truth" for their position. Those facts justify the status quo. Democrats suspect bias and self-interest. But sometimes even a stopped clock is right. It is good to have an open mind. Besides, in politics, it helps to know what information is circulating.

1. It isn't man. It's nature. Climate-change skeptics note that the earth's climate fluctuates. This is obvious based on the geological record of tropical plant fossils in the Arctic, unmistakable signs of Ice Ages, and remnants of swamp plants in the Sahara dated as recently as 5,000 years ago. The sun has variable output. We know the earth has variable tilt and an elliptical orbit. Sure climate is changing. It's natural.

2. We aren't warming. The data on rising temperatures is subject to dispute by climate skeptics. Temperature trends depend on start dates and what one considers "normal." We are warmer now than we were during the "Little Ice Age" that ended in 1850, but the earth isn't warmer than it was during the Roman empire. Who is to say what normal is? 

3. Nothing Americans might do matters. China and India are putting coal plants on line every two weeks and they aren't going to stop for decades or centuries. Climate change skeptics say that a Green New Deal is pointless.

4. CO2 greenhouse effect is modest. Climate skeptics say that clouds and water vapor are far more important than CO2. If temperatures rise a little from CO2, the extra moisture held in the warmer air will bounce radiation back into space. CO2's effect isn't linear and more of it has diminishing effect. More CO2 won't hurt.

5. Don't over-react to CO2 numbers. Climate change skeptics say that CO2 amounts in the atmosphere are no hazard. Indoor rooms with people in them routinely have 1,000 ppm. U.S. submarines are allowed to have up to 5,000 ppm before they adjust the CO2 level down. There is nothing special about 200 or 400 ppm.

6. More CO2 is good for plants.  Climate change skeptics say that Americans have conflated CO2 with pollution. CO2 isn't smoke. CO2 is good. It is plant food, the building block of life. We pump CO2 into greenhouses to make plants grow better. CO2 will make the earth greener so forests will grow better and farms will be more productive. 

7. We need more CO2.  It brings us back to normal. The continent of India is moving north into Asia. That has created a new and dangerous problem for the earth. Rain on the exposed rocks of Tibet pulls carbon out of the atmosphere when atmospheric carbon mixes with minerals in exposed rock. That carbon finds its way to rivers and it eventually settles sequestered in the ocean bottom. The "carbon cycle" is in overdrive, making this an CO2-deprived period in earth's history. This may explain this unusual three-million year cold period of Ice Ages. We need to restore a healthy carbon cycle. This argument contradicts the argument that extra CO2 doesn't warm the earth, but both arguments have adherents.

8. More CO2 is essential to save the planet. Climate change skeptics include people open to the idea of imminent climate catastrophe. Ice Age cycle timing suggests that we are at the tail-end of a 15,000-year interglacial period. We are due--possibly slightly overdue--to go back to accumulations of winter snow in northern latitudes in North America and Europe. That means we return to 100,000 years of mile-deep ice sheets down to the 42nd degree of latitude, i.e. New York City. The industrial revolution's use of coal in the early 19th century may have reversed the "little ice age." That thousand-year cold period may have been the return to "normal." Thank goodness for coal. Going forward, it will take far more atmospheric CO2 to stop the inescapable effect of earth's elliptical orbit and the Northern Hemisphere's tilt away from the summer sun. Summer sun stops accumulation of white light-reflective snow. We do face climate catastrophe, but in the opposite direction from the one feared. Modern humanity got accustomed to a short, freak period of interglacial weather. Fortunately, fossil fuels will save us and keep us in that zone--if we have enough of them.

There are other facts, trends, and climate models which give skeptics a basis for doing nothing. It is the job of scientists to be skeptical, to examine data, and to challenge existing paradigms. I welcome climate-skeptical scientists. We want to get this right.

Politicians, however, need not be rigorous. They need something plausible and pleasant to say to voters.  Climate change skeptics do not need to overthink this with talk of carbon sequestration and albedo feedback loops. Items one, two, and three are sufficient for the purposes of climate-skeptical politics: Don't blame us; the numbers are uncertain; blame China.