Climate Science: More Man-Made Than Climate Change

Or

Why I Was Black-Balled By The Man-Made Climate-Change Community


Please use the menu at the top of the page to access all topics.

It seems, everywhere you turn these days, there’s a new study, verifying that the earth is warming, that the ozone hole is getting larger, that carbon dioxide levels are increasing, that polar ice is melting, that sea level is rising, and that ocean currents are being altered. And it’s all because of human degradation and destruction.

“It’s the worst it’s been in recorded history” has become the mantra for the media to apply the label “man-made.” In all the sensationalistic news however is there never an explanation that “recorded history” is infinitesimal compared to the history of the earth, and the history of climate change.

Why is it then that the man-made climate-change (MMCC) enthusiasts insist on crediting human capitalism with our current warming climate? Could it be that everything we do burns up oxygen and turns it into carbon dioxide?  But that’s not unusual. Every species of animal does that. In fact, man’s total contribution of CO2 to the atmosphere by his industriousness is estimated to be approximately 3% by volume. The natural contribution to atmospheric CO2 is approximately 24% by volume. See the reference here. If we weren’t so industrious, we’d probably contribute only a small percentage (say about 3%) to this. So, as a species, we contribute about 6% to the total.  To be totally honest, I don’t know how much of the 6% is due to our farming and agricultural practices and other wastes we generate that would be present no matter how industrious we were. Unless we were to stop producing and harvesting in addition to discontinuing the manufacture of plastics, for example.

The percentage of CO2 in the atmosphere is about 0.04. So when a climate scientist argues that it is increasing, it is from a very small amount to a very small amount. CO2 levels in the atmosphere have increased previously, as measured in sediments and ice cores, to levels that we are seeing now. Remembering that historical levels are measured within some level of accuracy and error, they could have been somewhat higher or lower. Supposedly, however, CO2 levels are increasing at a faster rate than they would naturally, due to our extra contributions. The natural rate of increase again, however, is subject to measurement error.

What are the author’s qualifications for presenting this argument?  The author is a practicing geoscientist for 35 years. One of the basic tenets of this science is that the history of the earth, including previous climates, is stored in the sediments, rocks, ice, and water. Remember again that this gives us a picture of how conditions may have changed over the 4.5 billion years of the earth’s history, although somewhat incomplete and estimated.

So just how accurate is the science of MMCC? According to the IPCC,  the warming earth, spreading ozone hole, increasing carbon dioxide levels, melting polar ice, rising sea level, and shifting ocean currents coincide  with changes to the levels of gases being contributed to the atmosphere by man. Funny thing is we’ve only had the ability to measure temperature, sea level, ice and currents about as long as we’ve been able to measure the concentrations of the gases. This doesn’t mean that the gases have caused the warming and other changes, only that we’ve been measuring them at the same time.

Correlation does not imply causality. The earth has been warming naturally since the last glacial maximum and, more significantly, since the little ice age. Although the warming and changes in ice and sea level may be related, the relationship between human-made gases and warming is only coincidental at best. The gases that are considered to be greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and miscellaneous other gases. The miscellaneous gases include CFCs and the like, which are the only gases that are not also produced naturally, but account for only a fraction of a percentage of the atmospheric gases. The concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide that are produced by human industry account for approximately 4% of the total atmospheric concentrations of these gases. Natural sources account for approximately 23%, and the remaining 73% were present in the atmosphere prior to industrial development, and had also to have built up naturally.

The earth is warming, and it will cool again, naturally, as it has already done many times. It may coincide with changes in atmospheric gases. It has already done this too. Whether there is a cause and effect between climate change and the gases, the natural contribution far exceeds that extra part contributed by man’s industriousness. And insomuch as man is a part of nature, what part of his industriousness is not also natural?

Other Daily Mulls

AP FACT CHECK: On climate science, most GOP candidates fail – Yahoo News

Senate Votes to Block Obama’s Climate Change Rules – The New York Times

Leading Harvard physicist has a radical new theory for why humans exist

A giant man-made hole in Earth’s atmosphere is now larger than North America

Now In Paperback, Hardcover, and E-Book

Based on the blog series.

Published by Westbow Press.

Get more information about the book at the Author’s Website.

Look for it at major booksellers, including Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Books-A-Million,and Kobo.

 

Comment (1)

  1. Pingback: NASA satellites reveal something startling about the future of food on Earth |

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: