Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Questions, Questions

I've been having fun 'debating' with some of Andrew Bolt's pet contrarians on the issue of Climate Change/Global Warming/AGW/CAGW/Climate Crisis/weather.

Poster AS mocks Federal Opposition Leader Tony Abbott thus:

More like Abbott has leap even further into the realms of stupidity.

It is remarkable that he can be making policy in respect of science and he shows no more comprehension of the issues than talkback radio hosts.
Sadly the fine fellow kicks an own goal.

Among many, many other commenters was my humble contribution:

Show me some true science AS and I might agree with you.

But we’re not getting science from Flannery et al, we’re getting crystal ball prognostications based on computer modelling based on many assumptions which may or not be correct.

That’s not science that’s superstitious voodoo with increasingly hilarious alarmist predictions viz-a-viz the state of the Great Barrier Reef.

And yet, like all acolytes of the neo-pagan environmental movement, you and others keep repeating the mantra of ‘science, science, science’ like it will protect you like a talisman from the excesses of a vengeful Gaia.

Science is simply the systematic study of the nature and behaviour of the material and physical universe - it is subject to revision - it is not truth in of itself.

This hysteria that you’re clearly a part of AS, fails to take into account the extremely complex nature of our atmosphere due to a myriad of influences both internal and external to the system.

Unless you are a stuck in the mud contrarian, you would do better to broaden your perspective and ask a few more questions. Many spring to mind:

-- What influence does the sun have on our atmosphere?
-- Are there any other external influences (like cosmic radiation external to the sun)?
-- Are the changes to the climate truly global or localised?
-- Are the changes to the climate cyclical over short, medium and long periods of time?
-- What influence does ‘black smokers’ and other deep sea phenomenon have on sea temperatures and atmospheric composition?
-- Are the climate models being used accurate? How can it be proved?
-- Is the detail used to run the models accurate? How can it be proved?
-- Is there any guarantee that the earth will cool at all, let alone in 1000 years?
-- Is there any proof that the climate of 1000 years ago was any better?
In all seriousness, these are questions each one of us should be asking ahead of any government implementation of a tax or trading scheme that negatively impacts on economic growth and standard of living.

-- Nora

No comments: