I take a lot of heat from some readers of these pages about my standing on the issue of Global Warming. I believe it is real, some think I am full of hot air. *Warning: Pun Detected*
I think a lot of the problem people have is that we base a lot of our fear of Global Warming on Scientific Consensus, and not necessarily on direct evidence. We use models that predict the future based on the data collected around us. This causes skepticism in many peoples minds for of a variety of reasons, including but not limited to…
- A lack of strong science education leading to a distrust of science in general. One need look no further than places like Kansas, where the big bang and evolution are on equal footing with Bigfoot.
- Poor science reporting from major media outlets. Most major media outlets report scientific news incorrectly, which leads to lots of conflicting reports. Health sciences are the worst example of these. Example, one paper says wine is good for you, another says it is bad.
- Distrust of the source. For a lot of people, if Al Gore or Bill O’Reilly say something, it must be false/wrong/evil. Kind of the Ad Hominem attack from the opposite direction.
- Misunderstood Direct Evidence: “This winter was one of the coldest on record. Global Warming must be wrong!”.
So, given this distrust/misunderstanding/ignorance, one is constantly having to point to this scientific consensus and say that global warming is something to worry about, and if you care, do something about.
Well, it is beginning to turn out that some of the models are wrong. Rejoice o’ doubters? Nope, turns out they may have been wrong in the other direction. It seems they have been to optimistic. Here are some recent items that reinforce for me that the scientific consensus is more correct than your standard fox news watcher’s consensus.
Reports out of the IPCC and conclusions being reached by the Committee and reported by one of its scientific members, Tim Flannery, would indicate that we are reaching certain predicted milestones well ahead of schedule. Sea ice coverage in the arctic is shrinking well ahead of schedule (see charts below) and concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are rising ahead of prediction.
Arctic Sea Ice Loss compared to IPCC Models
This image comes from University of Illinois Polar Research Group.
This article highlights for me another of the most startling examples of warming. The loss of a glaciers in Glacier National Park. From the article:
Fagre initially pegged “zero” at about 2030, the year his models suggested the last of the glaciers would be gone from their namesake park.
“But we’re about eight and a half years ahead of schedule,” he said. “Our initial projection has proved too conservative. They’re going faster than we thought.”
The last official count — in 1998 — pegged the number of glaciers here at 27, down from 150 a century ago. Today, Fagre’s putting the final touches on a brand-new inventory, which surely will show far fewer than the 27 counted just a decade ago. Grinnell Glacier has lost 14 acres — 9% of its total coverage — just in the past 24 months, Fagre said, and that doesn’t even count acreage lost this summer.
More and more evidence becomes visible to the naked eye as time goes on, and the changes are worrying. As warming increases, the loss of life and property, the damage to life sustaining industries and the destruction of natural habitat increase. Soon we will need to take our heads out of the sand as global citizens and do more before we can’t.
