We have always had climate change, and until the Sun
incinerates the Earth, always will. Today’s warming is unprecedented only if
you abuse the word’s meaning by using qualifiers such as “unprecedented in the
last sixty years.” Recent global warming is unprecedented only since 1950:
warming from 1910 to 1950 (before large human-caused increases in CO2) was
0.5°Celsius; since 1950 total warming was only 0.4°C, including 0°C the past
fifteen years.
Unprecedented the past 1,000 years? The Medieval Warm Period
was 1°C warmer. Two-thousand years? The Roman Warm Period was 2°C warmer.
Four-thousand years? The Minoan Warm Period was 3°C warmer. Ten-thousand years?
The Holocene Climatic Optimum was the longest warm period since the end of the
Ice Age, and slightly more than 3°C warmer. The past 125,000 years? The Eemian
Climatic Optimum was almost 4°C warmer.
A letter last week used theories to define climate change
terms, but omitted supporting observations. It’s OK to say that something could
cause something, but if it doesn’t a new theory is demanded. Theoretically,
doubling atmospheric CO2 could raise global temperature 1.22°C, but while CO2
has climbed steadily for over sixty years, global temperature has not. In fact,
the world added roughly 110 billion tons of carbon to the atmosphere between
2000 and 2010, about a quarter of all the CO2 put there by humanity since 1750,
yet global temperature has been flat the last fifteen years.
The letter writer cited a “change of weather patterns as
compared to our stable Holocene past.” Only climate history ignorance could
inspire such a statement. Our Holocene past is filled with changing weather
patterns; reading Dr. H. H. Lamb’s excellent climatic histories would dispel
ignorance of an unstable Holocene.
When facts disagree with theory, alarmists want to change
the facts. Science can't work that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment