The science and politics of climate change Ian Plimer We derive scientific evidence from measurement, observation, and experiment. Evidence must be repeatable and collected over and over again. Computers do not generate evidence: they analyse evidence that should have been repeated and validated. On the basis of the evidence and analysis of evidence, an explanation is given. This explanation is a scientific theory and must be in accord with other validated evidence from diverse sources (this is known as the coherence criterion in science). Unlike in law, there is no inadmissible evidence in science. Science is underpinned by practitioners who must be sceptical of the methodology used to collect evidence, the analysis of evidence, and the conclusions based on the evidence. On the basis of new evidence, scientists must always be prepared to change their opinions. Science bows to no authority, is not based on a consensus, and is in a constant state of flux. No great advance in science has been made by consensus: advances have been made by individuals paddling upstream. If a scientific theory is not in accord with validated evidence, then the theory must be abandoned and reconstructed. It is scepticism that underpins science, not the comfort of consensus. The theory of human-induced global warming is not science because research is based on a pre-ordained conclusion, huge bodies of evidence are ignored, and the analytical procedures are treated as evidence. Furthermore, climate ‘science’ is sustained by government research grants. Funds are not available to investigate theories that are not in accord with government ideology. Many Western governments have a politically popular ideology that argues that:
i. There is an increase in emissions of carbon dioxide ( CO 2 ) by human activities;
ii. The increased CO 2 , a greenhouse gas, will lead to ever increasing global warming; iii. There will be tipping points, sea level rises, extinctions and ocean acidification; iv. Climate change will be irreversible and that human emissions of CO 2 must be reduced or stopped as soon as possible; and v. In order to stop climate change, energy sources need to be shifted from coal, gas and oil to wind, solar, tidal and biomass. i.
There is an increase in emissions of carbon dioxide by human activities Point (i) is correct. These emissions derive mainly from the developing world and the understandable desire of its people to reach the same standard of living as the Western middle class. It was coal in the Industrial Revolution that originally led to the rise of the middle class in the West. Now the new industrial revolution in China, India and East Asia is causing the largest migration of humans that has ever occurred, the rise of the middle class in these nations, and the use of steel and electricity, both of which derive from coal. The very slight increase in atmospheric CO 2 has led to a slight greening of the planet. As all farmers know, CO 2 is plant food and the emission of increasingly large amounts of CO 2 by humans is good for life on Earth. ii. The increased carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas, will lead to ever increasing global warming Point (ii) has shown to be invalid on all time scales. There is no doubt that CO 2 is a greenhouse gas. However, the main greenhouse gas is water vapour. The first 100 parts per million (ppm) of CO 2 have a significant effect on atmospheric temperature, whereas any increase from the current 400 ppm will have an insignificant effect. Furthermore, because CO 2 has a short residence time in the atmosphere, it is naturally sequestered into the oceans, life, or rocks in less than a decade. In fact, only one molecule of every 85,000 in the atmosphere is CO 2 of human origin, and yet we are asked to believe that this one molecule drives hugely complex climate change systems. We are also asked to believe that the 32 molecules of CO 2 of natural origin in every 85,000 molecules play no part in driving climate change. Despite a significant increase in industrial emissions of CO 2 , there has been no increase in global atmospheric temperature over the past seventeen years. This shows that the theory that CO 2 emissions of human origin drive global warming (and climate change) must be rejected. But this rejection has not yet taken place. In ice core measurements, the
evidence shows that temperature increase occurs hundreds to thousands of years before there is an increase in atmospheric CO 2 . This again shows that atmospheric CO 2 does not drive atmospheric temperature change. On yet another scale, geology shows that all six of the great ice ages were initiated when atmospheric CO 2 was far higher than at present and, with the first two great ice ages, up to a thousand times higher than the current atmospheric CO 2 content. Furthermore, geology shows that there has been sequestration of atmospheric CO 2 into limey sediments, other rocks and life for 2,500 million years. This process continues. The Earth currently has a very low CO 2 content compared with the past. We actually live in a cold epoch. Ice is a rare rock and has been on Earth for less than twenty per cent of its history. For most of time, planet Earth has been warmer and wetter. In the past, ecosystems thrived when there was a high atmospheric carbon dioxide content—especially if it was warm. This is known by horticulturalists. They pump warm CO 2 into glass houses. The optimum CO 2 content is more than 1,600 ppm (as compared with the current atmospheric content of 400 ppm). History shows that communities thrived when it was warm and there was massive depopulation during cooler times. It is only recently—when Westerners have been very affluent—that people have feared the warmth. In former times, communities feared the cold.
anel
