Not so Fast

Continuing the eco-conversation that some of us global warming skeptics are trying to have with the diehard dogmatists of the Left, the WSJ points out a few salient facts. For one thing, the IPCC report, written by policy makers, not scientists, is only a summary of a detailed report due out in May:

More pertinent is the underlying scientific report. And according to people who have seen that draft, it contains startling revisions of previous U.N. predictions. For example, the Center for Science and Public Policy has just released an illuminating analysis written by Lord Christopher Monckton, a one-time adviser to Margaret Thatcher who has become a voice of sanity on global warming.

Take rising sea levels. In its 2001 report, the U.N.'s best high-end estimate of the rise in sea levels by 2100 was three feet. Lord Monckton notes that the upcoming report's high-end best estimate is 17 inches, or half the previous prediction. Similarly, the new report shows that the 2001 assessment had overestimated the human influence on climate change since the Industrial Revolution by at least one-third.

The Monckton analysis is available here. (Click on the first document under what's new.) And UN computer models had predicted significant rising temperatures should have occurred these past few years, but the actual temperature rise is statistically insignificant. Meanwhile, the geniuses at Cambridge University's Institute of Manufacturing, cited in an approving Tribune editorial are suggesting we lease our clothes and retire the iron (!)

Here's another idea which may be one of a few realistic quick fixes, until alternatives like nuclear energy can kick in. Steve Huntley, Sun Times, RCP talks about new uses for coal:

While that's a step in the right direction, it -- like Bush's proposal -- seems modest. And narrowly focused. What about the potential for coal to be a source of ethanol and methanol? The latter is the alcohol that has powered speedsters in the Indianapolis 500 race. Only a couple of years ago, the Department of Energy helped fund a private-industry project demonstrating technology to convert coal to methanol that outperformed other clean coal processes. The plant at Kingsport, Tenn., was capable of producing 104 million gallons of methanol a day at a cost, according to the Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, of under 50 cents a gallon.

So not so fast, greenies. The debate's not over, and in the meantime there's no sense crippling our economy with onerous taxes and regulations. The market continues to seek better sources at lower cost. We have time to figure it out. But there is one measure we adopted quickly---most of us retired the iron years ago.


Previous post: The Cosmic Ray Theory

UPDATE: An eminent Canadian climatologist, Dr. Tim Ball, has this to say:

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. [snip]

Since I obtained my doctorate in climatology from the University of London, Queen Mary College, England my career has spanned two climate cycles. Temperatures declined from 1940 to 1980 and in the early 1970's global cooling became the consensus. This proves that consensus is not a scientific fact. By the 1990's temperatures appeared to have reversed and Global Warming became the consensus. It appears I'll witness another cycle before retiring, as the major mechanisms and the global temperature trends now indicate a cooling. [snip]

I once received a three page letter that my lawyer defined as libellous, from an academic colleague, saying I had no right to say what I was saying, especially in public lectures. Sadly, my experience is that universities are the most dogmatic and oppressive places in our society. This becomes progressively worse as they receive more and more funding from governments that demand a particular viewpoint.[snip]

As Lindzen said many years ago: "the consensus was reached before the research had even begun." Now, any scientist who dares to question the prevailing wisdom is marginalized and called a sceptic, when in fact they are simply being good scientists. This has reached frightening levels with these scientists now being called climate change denier with all the holocaust connotations of that word. The normal scientific method is effectively being thwarted.