Chinks in the Armor

When The Nation begins to question a pet project, odds are that pet project is really starting to annoy the heck out of some people.

Via GeoSciBlog, NewsBusters, and ultimately Counterpunch for the full article (or you can subscribed to The Nation to get the article, but come on, do you really want to do that?):

Is Global Warming a Sin, by Andrew Cockburn

The modern trade is as fantastical as the medieval one. There is still zero empirical evidence that anthropogenic production of CO2 is making any measurable contribution to the world’s present warming trend. The greenhouse fearmongers rely entirely on unverified, crudely oversimplified computer models to finger mankind’s sinful contribution. Devoid of any sustaining scientific basis, carbon trafficking is powered by guilt, credulity, cynicism and greed, just like the old indulgences, though at least the latter produced beautiful monuments. By the sixteenth century, long after the world had sailed safely through the end of the first millennium, Pope Leo X financed the reconstruction of St. Peter’s Basilica by offering a “plenary” indulgence, guaranteed to release a soul from purgatory.

Now imagine two lines on a piece of graph paper. The first rises to a crest, then slopes sharply down, then levels off and rises slowly once more. The other has no undulations. It rises in a smooth, slowly increasing arc. The first, wavy line is the worldwide CO2 tonnage produced by humans burning coal, oil and natural gas. On this graph it starts in 1928, at 1.1 gigatons (i.e. 1.1 billion metric tons). It peaks in 1929 at 1.17 gigatons. The world, led by its mightiest power, the USA, plummets into the Great Depression, and by 1932 human CO2 production has fallen to 0.88 gigatons a year, a 30 per cent drop. Hard times drove a tougher bargain than all the counsels of Al Gore or the jeremiads of the IPCC (Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change). Then, in 1933 it began to climb slowly again, up to 0.9 gigatons.

And the other line, the one ascending so evenly? That’s the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere, parts per million (ppm) by volume, moving in 1928 from just under 306, hitting 306 in 1929, to 307 in 1932 and on up. Boom and bust, the line heads up steadily. These days it’s at 380.There are, to be sure, seasonal variations in CO2, as measured since 1958 by the instruments on Mauna Loa, Hawai’i. (Pre-1958 measurements are of air bubbles trapped in glacial ice.) Summer and winter vary steadily by about 5 ppm, reflecting photosynthesis cycles. The two lines on that graph proclaim that a whopping 30 per cent cut in man-made CO2 emissions didn’t even cause a 1 ppm drop in the atmosphere’s CO2. Thus it is impossible to assert that the increase in atmospheric CO2 stems from human burning of fossil fuels.

Now, it should be mentioned that there are some fallacies in the piece, such as the suggestion the molten core of the earth could contribute to global warming (and if it is, it’s coming from oceanic currents), but that would require a reason as to why the core of the Earth is getting hotter, and that flies in the face of thermodynamics. There would have to be an external force acting on the core of the planet.

Additionally, the lag data of carbon dioxide certainly suggests the oceans are releasing more carbon dioxide, but that doesn’t mean man isn’t causing the oceans to warm up. (Come on, all those nuclear submarines must be heating the ocean!) But when you consider the mass of the ocean and the sheer volume of water that must be changed to release more CO2, it seems terribly unlikely that man-made warming of the planet is feeding back into the oceans to release more CO2.

I’ve been awfully interested in planetary dynamics recently, especially about the dynamics of the Venusian renewable crust and if there’s a correlation between gravity and planetary core dynamics. I would like to do a study on the gravitational forces exerted on Io and compare that to the forces exerted on Venus and Earth and see if there’s a correlation between distance, planetary core, volcanism, and temperature. If you’re interested, drop me a line.


0 Responses to “Chinks in the Armor”

  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

About Me

My name is Doc. Welcome to my blog. If you're visiting from another blog, add me to your blogroll (and I'll happily reciprocate). I have a Ph.D. in Chemistry and live in Wisconsin. If you have any questions, feel free to email me. My email is docattheautopsy at gmail. (No linking to deflate the incredible spam monsters).



World Temp Widget

Blog Stats

  • 131,715 hits

RSS The Autopsy

The Autopsy

%d bloggers like this: