You’ve heard the same arguments many times over, haven’t you?
Conservative: I’m pretty skeptical of global warming.
Global Warming Alarmist: YOU HATE SCIENCE! POLAR BEARS WILL DIE BECAUSE OF YOU!
Conservative: Okay, give me some scientific evidence that proves global warming is occurring?
Global Warming Alarmist: There’s a scientific consensus it’s occurring!
Conservative: “Scientific consensus” isn’t the same thing as “scientific evidence.” How do you explain the fact that global temperatures haven’t gone up in the last 15 years or that we know for a fact that temperatures haven’t corresponded with the increase in greenhouse gasses this century? What about the fact that it was warmer during the Medieval Warm Period than it is today?
Global Warming Alarmist: DIDN’T YOU HEAR ME? YOU HATE SCIENCE! POLAR BEARS WILL DIE! SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS!
Conservative: Ehr….okay. So, you mentioned scientific consensus again. Even if there are more scientists who believe manmade global warming is occurring, there are thousands of informed scientists who say it’s not.
Global Warming Alarmist: ANY “SCIENTIST” WHO DISAGREES ISN’T QUALIFIED OR IS BEING PAID OFF TO CLAIM WE’RE NOT ALL GOING TO DIE!
You get the idea, right?
Well, that last point? It wasn’t true in the first place, but it’s going to be even harder to argue after this,
A group of top NASA boffins says that current climate models predicting global warming are far too gloomy, and have failed to properly account for an important cooling factor which will come into play as CO2 levels rise.
According to Lahouari Bounoua of NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center, and other scientists from NASA and the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), existing models fail to accurately include the effects of rising CO2 levels on green plants. As green plants breathe in CO2 in the process of photosynthesis – they also release oxygen, the only reason that there is any in the air for us to breathe – more carbon dioxide has important effects on them.
…The NASA and NOAA boffins used their more accurate science to model a world where CO2 levels have doubled to 780 parts per million (ppm) compared to today’s 390-odd. They say that world would actually warm up by just 1.64°C overall, and the vegetation-cooling effect would be stronger over land to boot – thus temperatures on land would be a further 0.3°C cooler compared to the present sims.
International diplomatic efforts under UN auspices are currently devoted to keeping global warming limited to 2°C or less, which under current climate models calls for holding CO2 to 450 ppm – or less in many analyses – a target widely regarded as unachievable. Doubled carbon levels are normally viewed in the current state of enviro play as a scenario that would lead to catastrophe; that is, to warming well beyond 2°C.
It now appears, however, that the previous/current state of climate science may simply have been wrong and that there’s really no need to get in an immediate flap. If Bounoua and her colleagues are right, and CO2 levels keep on rising the way they have been lately (about 2 ppm each year), we can go a couple of centuries without any dangerous warming. There are lots of other factors in play, of course, but nonetheless the new analysis is very reassuring.
So, we have NASA scientists saying that greenhouse gasses aren’t going to cause manmade global warming. Say what you want, but it’s yet more SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE that the global warming alarmists are wrong.