If there is one thing that really gets up my nose it is the smug and throw away comment ‘Climate Change Denier’ once again used by President Obama. It’s easy to insult and throw names around and I know that is what politicians engage in, but what exactly does climate change denier mean? I think he is talking about me, but I really need to find out for sure. You see I do not deny climate change at all. I never have. I never will and unlike Mr. Obama who only recently discovered the phrase, I wrote a PhD (in part) on climate change in 1984.
You see, those of us that actually research and conduct science as opposed to throw around insulting names and political wise cracks, know that the Earth is not a dead planet. Far from it. It is a vibrant living planet and its climate changes continually and naturally and has done for billions of years. It’s in the geological record for those who care to look. Not only that but believe or not sea-level is rather volatile too. A living planet needs CO2 in its atmosphere because its what plants breath and in return they gift us with Oxygen. So actually I am an advocate of climate change. It’s Mr. Obama who is the denier as he seems to think climate change is a man-made phenomenon.
We are in danger of having people actually believe that CO2 is a pollutant as a result of this politicking. We are in danger of having people think that the IPCC truly is scientific and represents science. The science is proven! What an oxymoron. Science is a form of philosophy and is never proven by definition. In fact by trying to assert that the science is proven, science is being irrevocably damaged. Am I the only one that finds this totally obnoxious?
Today, CO2 is somewhere around 400ppm. Actually, far from being some high-water record, its pretty close to the minimum it has ever been in the history of the planet. Indeed, for the second time, our planet was on the way to being a dead, CO2 deficient planet as plants struggle at 280ppm and die at 180ppm of CO2. Note also the (lack of a) relationship in geological time between CO2 and temperature……
As for these scientists who overwhelmingly support this notion, that too is nonsense – pure propaganda and politics. Here is where that 97% figure actually comes from and the questions asked –
2009 – Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
1. When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?
2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?
I would answer yes to both questions too. On #2, there is no doubt that conurbations and big cities for example have contributed to warmer temperatures. You see, this is truly misleading – where does this survey ask if manmade CO2 is the cause? It doesn’t.
In fact, I signed a petition recently along with 31,500 other scientist that says I disagree.
Mr. Obama and his ilk are actually the climate change deniers. They ignore the facts for the politics. They ignore the geological record and instead believe that Man is paramount and his impact is to change something that was once static?