Investors Business Daily reports.
America is a global warming success story, for those who believe in such things. CO2 emissions are on the downtrend in this country. In fact, they are lower today than they were two decades ago. When you account for all the economic and population growth over those 20 years, that decline is even sharper.
What’s more, the U.S. — along with several other industrialized nations — is below the CO2 emission targets set by the Kyoto protocol. You know, the treaty that Al Gore & Co. said would save the planet, but that America never ratified.
China is a completely different story. It’s tripled the amount of CO2 it pumps into the air each year over those same two decades, to the point where it now emits almost twice as much CO2 as the U.S.
Other developing countries are spewing CO2 at record levels as well. And all are increasing at rates much faster than industrialized nations could ever hope to cut theirs back.
So where are the protestors? Are they in Beijing demanding that the communist leaders there “change course”? Are they in India — where CO2 levels have doubled in the past two decades — demanding more solar panels and electric cars?
Nope. Instead they flock together in New York, in London, even Australia (which emits as much CO2 in an entire year as China does in 16 days).
I guess I don’t really care about CO2 levels with respect to climate change, because like all other sane people, I have watched almost all of the projections made by global warming alarmists be falsified in my lifetime by actual data.
The Wall Street Journal explains how this was done.
The U.N. no longer claims that there will be dangerous or rapid climate change in the next two decades. Last September, between the second and final draft of its fifth assessment report, the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change quietly downgraded the warming it expected in the 30 years following 1995, to about 0.5 degrees Celsius from 0.7 (or, in Fahrenheit, to about 0.9 degrees, from 1.3).
Even that is likely to be too high. The climate-research establishment has finally admitted openly what skeptic scientists have been saying for nearly a decade: Global warming has stopped since shortly before this century began.
First the climate-research establishment denied that a pause existed, noting that if there was a pause, it would invalidate their theories. Now they say there is a pause (or “hiatus”), but that it doesn’t after all invalidate their theories.
When the climate scientist and geologist Bob Carter of James Cook University in Australia wrote an article in 2006 saying that there had been no global warming since 1998 according to the most widely used measure of average global air temperatures, there was an outcry. A year later, when David Whitehouse of the Global Warming Policy Foundation in London made the same point, the environmentalist and journalist Mark Lynas said in the New Statesman that Mr. Whitehouse was “wrong, completely wrong,” and was “deliberately, or otherwise, misleading the public.”
We know now that it was Mr. Lynas who was wrong. Two years before Mr. Whitehouse’s article, climate scientists were already admitting in emails among themselves that there had been no warming since the late 1990s. “The scientific community would come down on me in no uncertain terms if I said the world had cooled from 1998,” wrote Phil Jones of the University of East Anglia in Britain in 2005. He went on: “Okay it has but it is only seven years of data and it isn’t statistically significant.”
If the pause lasted 15 years, they conceded, then it would be so significant that it would invalidate the climate-change models upon which policy was being built. Areport from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) written in 2008 made this clear: “The simulations rule out (at the 95% level) zero trends for intervals of 15 yr or more.”
Well, the pause has now lasted for 16, 19 or 26 years—depending on whether you choose the surface temperature record or one of two satellite records of the lower atmosphere. That’s according to a new statistical calculation by Ross McKitrick, a professor of economics at the University of Guelph in Canada.
It has been roughly two decades since there was a trend in temperature significantly different from zero. The burst of warming that preceded the millennium lasted about 20 years and was preceded by 30 years of slight cooling after 1940.
I love science. But I love experimental science. When you have government, which is intent on growing larger, paying scientists to find evidence that government needs to grow larger, you have a conflict of interest. We shouldn’t be so anxious to appear on the side of the “smart” people, because “smart” people have a tendency to say stupid things when there is money being pressed into their hands. We need to be skeptical.
The cosmic background radiation is fact. The fine-tuning of the force of gravity is fact. Protein folding is fact. Predicting the weather hundreds of years into the future is something else entirely. Especially when you have to edit out the Medieval Warming Period and “hide the decline using Mike’s Nature trick”. That certainly isn’t science. It’s prostitution.