Climate Change vs. Climate Change, which one of these is man made?
The popular theory today is that Global Climate changes are manmade, so people should change their lifestyle to protect the environment. I disagree with the first portion of this idea but firmly agree with the latter. There are many factors used within the construction of the Global Climate Change model that can drastically influence the outcome of any report derived from these models. These factors can be implied or expressed, but their impact on the outcome of the climate model and the inferring implications with regard to Mans part of the Global Climate debate is undeniable. Some of these factors include Un-provable logical premises, the construction of the greenhouse gases inventory used in the model and referential time bases used in the climate model.
Let me begin this discussion by stating that I am an advocate of environmental conservancy. Man has been a horrible steward of the air, water, and land that God has provided for us for far too long. We are poisoning the air that we breathe with poisons like formaldehyde and sulfur dioxide to the point that the rains have turned acidic. We have contaminated the water that we drink with toxics, wastes, sewage and heavy metals. We have done this to the point that we now have entire rivers that are nearly devoid of aquatic life. We have polluted the ground that we walk on through nearly uncontrolled strip mining of coal, and contaminate from nitrate runoff. All of the things that I have just mentioned are the direct result of Man’s poor stewardship of the planet that he has inherited from past generations. Nobody denies that these things have been caused by man, and that because they were caused by man, that man should clean up his own mess. This is not necessarily the case when it comes to the issue of Global Climate Change. There is a fundamental difference between Climate Change and Climate Change. The difference between these two terms is mainly due to ideology and inferences of false assumptions that tend to be associated to the latter term by certain activist groups.
I do believe that there is indisputable proof that the earth’s temperature has indeed been gradually changing over the last 100 years or so. Most of the experts on both sides of this hotly debated issue will agree on this scientific fact.
What is really in debate is the question: “To what degree did man participate in this gradual temperature change process?” The answer to this single question begins the slide down a slippery slope of other new questions and possible false assumptions. This is where the schism begins between the terms Climate Change and Climate Change. The term Climate Change merely states a commonly accepted scientific fact that the earth is indeed experiencing a general shift in climate. On the other hand, Climate Change uses the same words to incite fear and promote an activist political agenda. Political activist groups have been capitalizing on this confusion of terms and misleading data in order to sway public opinion on this issue. (Travis William Reynolds, 2010) There are several factors that used when creating the climate change model that play a part in determining Mans culpability with regards to Global Climate Change.
I am not a believer in Climate Change. Let me explain why. The theory of Climate Change, Global Cooling, Global Warming, or whatever “nam de plume” you choose, is based on improvable premise. This improvable premise is that Man is the major contributor of pollutants that are presumed to be the cause of the temperature shift mentioned earlier. This improvable premise when combined with a few other interrelated underlying presumptions creates another assumption that Climate Change actually is a crisis. I have listed some of the more popular assumptions below
· Man and his pollution are a major factor in the global warming trend
· Something should be done about this! (This statement has three inherent assumptions built into it)
Strayer University(1) There is a “crisis” and it is man-made.
(2) Man can and has changed the weather
(3) Man should again change the weather to correct the changes that he has already inflicted on the planet.
Many of these premises and assumptions create logical paradoxes. Man, has been trying to change the weather since the beginning of time. There are numerous biblical and historical accounts of these attempts to change the weather. The underlying premises for Climate Change are that (1) there is a “crisis” and man manufactures it. (2) Man can somehow change the weather patterns on a global and possible permanent scale. This premise also presupposes that these changes have most likely occurred in the last 150 or years. To put this into a perspective, man only began believing that the earth was round, and that it was not the center of the universe, about 500 years ago. Is it logical then to presuppose that man has been able to unintentionally make the same weather changes in 150 years that he has been struggling to make intentionally since the beginning of time? If either of these presuppositions were true, logic would dictate that the direction of this global temperature shift would be only in an upward dirStrayer Universityection. So far, the very direction of the supposed temperature change has been hugely debated.
There is an underlying assumption in the second presupposition that the degree of this unintentionally climate change is so pervasive that it threatens man's very existence, or at least will drastically affect the course of human history. Again, I have a hard time buying into this premise. I don't believe this because, so far, nobody has been able to confirm the direction of this supposed crisis, much less the severity of it or Man’s level of participation in it.
The third presupposition (3) Man should again change the weather to correct the changes that he has already inflicted on the planet depends completely on the idea that all of the other suppositions that I have mentioned earlier are all true, and can be categorically confirmed as such. This third presupposition states that the only way to fix this supposed crisis is to intentionally make corrective weather changes that will counteract the same weather changes that we supposedly created unintentionally in the first place. The pairing of the first and third presuppositions creates a paradox. The main difference between the terms Climate Change and Climate Change is the difference between words chosen to depict an actual and provable progression of events, versus the same words chosen to incite fear and promote and agenda.
Several factors can have a profound effect on outcome and accuracy of any Climate Change model. These factors include (1) the scope of the gases that are considered to be greenhouse gases, (2) The reference time frame used when determining the rate of temperature change, and what ranges of temperature changes are considered normal. (3) The time frame that we have been collecting information on greenhouse gases as compared to the reference time frame mentioned in item (2). A change in any of these factors has a profound effect in the outcome of the Climate Change model created.
Greenhouse gases are gases that both absorb thermal radiation, and also emit thermal radiation downward toward the earth. These gases create a one way heat filter that essentially allows heat to be trapped between this layer of gases and the earth. This is commonly referred to as the greenhouse effect. There are literally thousands of natural causes of green house gases. Many of these greenhouse gases are the same gases that Man has been blamed for contributing to the atmosphere. The most common greenhouse gases include things such as water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4). “The full range of sources of greenhouses gases - both natural and anthropogenic - is not yet fully understood and continues to be the subject of both research and debate.” (The Enviromental Literarcy Council, Greenhouse Gases, 2011) According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) there are very few greenhouse gases that are created exclusively by man. The majority of the greenhouse gases are created by both man andStrayer UniversityStrayer University by natural sources. (2011 U.S. Greenho - Greenhouse Gas Emissionsuse Gas Inventory Report | Climate Change - Greenhouse Gas Emissions) In order to determine the overall effect of both naturally occurring and manmade greenhouse gases, a calculation called the Global Warming Potential (GWP) is created. This GWP calculation represents the measure of how much heat a particular greenhouse gas can hold. (Global-warmingpotential - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) The presence or absence of water vapor greenhouse gases inventory has a profound effect on the outcomes derived from the Climate Change model. It is common knowledge within the scientific community that water vapor is an essential part of our atmosphere, and without it, life on earth would not be possible. The inclusion or exclusion of water vapor as a greenhouse gas skews the man made greenhouse contribution number drastically as water vapor is almost 99.999% of natural origin. (Global Warming: A closer look at the numbers) The proportion of water vapor as compared to all other greenhouse gases is roughly 95%, which leaves all of the other greenhouse gases to compose the remaining 5%. I find it interesting that even the EPA seems to add to the confusion of terms where greenhouse gases are concerned. “Some greenhouse gases such as carbon dioxide occur naturally and are emitted to the atmosphere through natural processes and human activities. Other greenhouse gases (e.g., fluorinated gases) are created and emitted solely through human activities.” (Agency, 2011). It is interesting to note that the EPA lists most of the same gases in both the Man made list of gases, and the Naturally Occurring list of gases. (2011 U.S. Greenho - Greenhouse Gas Emissionsuse Gas Inventory Report | Climate Change - Greenhouse Gas Emissions)
The remaining 5% of the greenhouse gases when water vapor is excluded comes from both natural and manmade sources. Natural sources of gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4) include volcanoes, and plant decomposition such as swamps, or wetlands. Man made sources of these same gases include car exhaust and pollutants airborne from manufacturing and power generation facilities. The inclusion or exclusion or vapor from the greenhouse gases inventory during the creation of the climate model can greatly impact the estimates of mans responsibility. This single factoring agent can change Mans estimated burden of responsibility from .28% with water vapor included as compared to as much as 5.5% contribution of greenhouse gases without water vapor included. (Global Warming: A closer look at the numbers) There are many other ways that Man indirectly contributes to the greenhouse gas emissions that are even harder still to quantify. Some of these indirect contributors include the deforestation of large tract of rain forest land, and sprawling urban construction projects. Both of these man driven actions have an effect on plant life that filters out CO2 and other greenhouse gases. These types of relationships are nearly impossible to quantify accurately.
Based on the analysis of entrapped air from ice cores extracted from permanent glaciers from various regions around the globe, it has been demonstrated that global warming began 18,000 years ago, accompanied by a steady rise in atmospheric carbon dioxide. (Hubertus Fischer, 1999) If a time reference such as the one Fischer suggests is used when composing a Climate Change model, the rate severity, and rate of change seems to fall well within normal cyclical patterns. However, most of the Climate Change models touted by many alarmist activist groups use a time reference that focuses on the industrial age, beginning sometime in the early 1800s. When this shorter reference is used to compose the model, much greater sense of urgency is inferred as the rate of change, and severity of change numbers are viewed.
The EPA and other world climate organizations have only been collecting greenhouse gas data for the last 30 years or so. It is important to understand this timeframe and its relationship to the other two timeframes mentioned earlier. It is this timeframe that is used to reference the greenhouse gases themselves and relationship of rate production of these gases to the rate of temperature change. The greenhouse gas timeframe is an embedded part of calculations, which are used to create an indicator of Man’s culpability in creating same greenhouse gases, as well as indicators used to represent Man’s culpability in the Climate Crisis as a whole.
The answer to this question is still hotly debated within the scientific communities. I think that the most honest answer to this question is that nobody really knows. Many logical inconsistencies exist when one makes the claim that “Global Climate changes are manmade, so people should change their lifestyle to protect the environment.” There is so much overlap in the gases kinds of gases that are both man made and naturally occurring it is nearly impossible to come to any kind to conclusion as to Man’s culpability in the production of greenhouse gases. The consist of the greenhouse gases inventory used when creating the climate model can drastically skew the estimate of Mans responsibility in the Global Climate issue. Some portions of the agents that cause Global Climate are probably man made. There are many conflicting calculations and faulty indicators that have been used in an attempt place the blame on Man as the leading contributor to Global Climate Change. There are also logical problems with some of the presumptions used to create Climate Change models used to manufacture the data points used to debate Man’s role with regard to Climate Change. There is a general lack of conclusive evidence at this time to prove that Man is the main culprit and source of the presumed crisis of Global Climate situation. This lack of evidence needed to place the burden of responsibility on Man does not however negate Man’s responsibility do everything within his power to protect the environment. There are plenty of other environmental problems today that are exclusively man made that need to be addressed.
2011 U.S. Greenho - Greenhouse Gas Emissionsuse Gas Inventory Report | Climate Change - Greenhouse Gas Emissions. (n.d.). Retrieved Nov 5, 2011, from USEPA: http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/usinventoryreport.html
Agency, U. S. (2011). Greenhouse Gas Emissions- Climage Change . Retrieved Nov 5, 2011, from US EPA: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/index.html
Ansari, A. H. (2011). Peatlands and Global Warming: A Study with Special Reference to South-East Asian Countries. Australian Journal of Basic & Applied Sciences , 10.
Begley, S. M. (2007, July 2). Which of These is Not Causing Global Warming Today? A. Sport utility vehicles; B. Rice fields; C. Increased solar output. Newsweek , p. 12.
Benson, M. (2003). student essay contest: Using economics to cool down the environment. Region.
Crowley, T. J. (2000). Causes of Climate Change Over the Past 1000 Years. Science .
Global Warming: A closer look at the numbers. (n.d.). Retrieved Nov 5, 2011, from Global Warming: A closer look at the numbers: http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/ice_ages.html#anchor2108263
Global-warmingpotential - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (n.d.). Retrieved Nov 5, 2011, from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global-warming_potential
Happer, W. (2011). Climate Science in the Political Arena. Congressional Testimony (p. 8). Washington DC: Federal Document Clearinghouse.
Holger Braun, M. C. (2005). Possible solar origin of the 1,470-year glacial climate cycle demonstrated in a coupled model. Nature , Vol 438 (10), 10.
Hubertus Fischer, M. W. (1999). Ice Core Records of Atmospheric CO2 Around the Last Three Glacial Terminations. Science , 283 (5408), 4.
Reynolds, T. W., Bostrom, A., Read, D., & Morgan, M. G. (2010, October 30). Now What Do People Know About Global Climate Change? Survey Studies of Educated Laypeople. Risk Analysis: An International Journal , 19.
Schneider, D. G. (1997, March 1). Trends in CLimate Research: The Rising Seas. Scientific American , p. 20.
The Economist. (2005, Feb 26). Science and Technology: Oceans apart; Climate change. Economist , p. 6.
The Enviromental Literarcy Council, Greenhouse Gases. (2011). Retrieved Nov 5, 2011, from Environmental Literacy Council: http://www.enviroliteracy.org/article.php/428.php
Travis William Reynolds, A. B. (2010). Now What Do People Know About Global Climate Change? Survey Studies of Educated Laypeople. Risk Analysis , 30 (10), 10.
Whorf, C. D. (n.d.). The 1,800-year oceanic tidal cycle: A possible cause of rapid climate change. PNAS 2000 97 (8) 3814-3819 .