From: kjun@typhoon.atmos.colostate.edu (Pat Fitzpatrick)
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: Global Warming, again (was Re: Media bias)
Keywords: bias
Date: 24 Jul 92 17:43:30 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Colorado State University -- Atmos Sci

In article <1992Jul24.021833.18081@seq.uncwil.edu> session@seq.uncwil.edu (Zack C. Sessions) writes:
>
>The graphs CLEARLY show a warming trend, an increase of about 0.5 degrees
>Centagrade. Granted, 0.5 degrees C isn't a whole hell of a lot, but it
>only takes a few degrees of increase of average temperature to influence
>global weather patterns, and thus global climate.
>
>The graph also shows that the increase is increasing. The data also shows
>that the 1980s was the hottest decade on record and that 1990 (and since then
>1991) were the hottest years on record.
>
>Yes, I can unequivocably say the Earth is warming.

Atmospheric scientists do not share your optimism (er, pessimism)

"Warming" has been below the minimum predicted -- and within - the expected
range as the world recovers from the "little ice age" that bottomed out 200
years ago. Most warming has been in the Southern Hemisphere. Northern daytime
temperatures are falling!

Nor do carbon dioxide levels explain the temperature record. Nearly all the
warming occurred before 1940, when human-generated CO2 was 25% of what it is 
today. From 1938 until 1976, temperatures dropped damatically as CO2
emissions skyrocketed.

The global warming theory  remains popular not because it is supported by
evidence, but because it is simple. By contrast, weather -- and thus the many
factors climate models fail to understand - is complex. It is easier to 
understand how the theory might be true than to perceive why it is false.

You see, Zack, you are thinking linear. This is the mistake most people
without a science background make. Actually, weather (and life in general)
is nonlinear. If the weather was linear, we could predict the weather to
infinity. If life was linear, we could predict the stock market, people's
emotions, etc...

It is difficult to explain the concept of nonlinearity to someone without a
science and math background (I warned you, Zack -- you are in over your head)
but I wil try. Say you have a current of water. Place a balloon containing
a liquid of lighter density so that it floats, and watch what happens. It will
wiggle off to some direction. Try it again, but this time it will wiggle off
in another direction. You can try this as much as you want, but you will
never be able to duplicate the same pattern.

This is because the system is nondeterministic and also because it is
extremely sensitive to initial conditions, and is the essence of chaos
theory. The atmosphere is a chaotic system. This is why predicting the
weather past a few days is impossible and foolhardy. Yet this is what people
are trying to do with Global Warming!

You see, the atmosphere has so many variables and so many "check and
balances" that applying one variable (namely CO2) is silly. It is not linear!
There is no one-to-one ratio.

I could also bring in theories from radiative transfer, cloud budgets etc
to expound this argument but I think you get my drift.

A couple of other points:

A conference was held here at CSU in May in which hundreds of atmospheric
scientists attended. Of course there are lots of disagreements about
various theories among them, including Global Warming. However, during
one of the open forums, the question was posed:

"How many here think, without a doubt, that global warming is occurring?"

NOT ONE PERSON RAISED THEIR HAND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So you see, Zack, the top atmospheric scientists do not share your view.

Finally, about Science magazine. you are right, this is one of the better
science magazine for laymen. However, for real insight on Global Warming,
I challenge you to read these journals instead:

1) Bulletin of the AMerican Meteorological Society
2) Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences
3) Monthly Weather Review

These will show the true complexity of the theory, not little blurbs
present in typical peasant magazines and newspapers.

Good hunting!

Pat Fitzpatrick
Newsgroups: alt.activism.d,alt.rush-limbaugh,talk.politics.misc