“Global Chilling”? What is this???

September 22, 2007 in global warming, politics
Tags: global chilling, James Hansen

Friends,

We have been warned and warned and warned that the current spate of warm temperatures has been caused, not entirely, but mostly by man. Has this always been the case?

Consider this story/editorial from Investors.com. The editorial is titled: The ‘Old’ Consensus?:

Climate Change: Did NASA scientist James Hansen, the global warming alarmist in chief, once believe we were headed for . . . an ice age? An old Washington Post story indicates he did.

On July 9, 1971, the Post published a story headlined “U.S. Scientist Sees New Ice Age Coming.” It told of a prediction by NASA and Columbia University scientist S.I. Rasool. The culprit: man’s use of fossil fuels.

The Post reported that Rasool, writing in Science, argued that in “the next 50 years” fine dust that humans discharge into the atmosphere by burning fossil fuel will screen out so much of the sun’s rays that the Earth’s average temperature could fall by six degrees.

Sustained emissions over five to 10 years, Rasool claimed, “could be sufficient to trigger an ice age.”

The editorial goes on to suggest that perhaps all the hubbub over ‘global warming’ is merely a politically motivated, politically charged idea. It also grants that people have the right to change their mind, but it wonders if the change of mind was based on ‘empirical evidence’ (the editorial is referring to James Hansen’s recent change of mind). The editorial says:

People can change their positions based on new information or by taking a closer or more open-minded look at what is already known. There’s nothing wrong with a reversal or modification of views as long as it is arrived at honestly.

But what about political hypocrisy? It’s clear that Hansen is as much a political animal as he is a scientist. Did he switch from one approaching cataclysm to another because he thought it would be easier to sell to the public? Was it a career advancement move or an honest change of heart on science, based on empirical evidence?

The thing for me is: what is the motivation behind all this madness? What, honestly, are we supposed to do about global warming? Are we supposed to make the sun cool down? Regardless of what ‘we contribute’ the earth still warms up because of the Sun beating down on this planet. Are we to tell the sun to stop?

I think people need to stop worrying so much about it because mostly I think this is a politically motivated problem. I’m willing to bet that when George Bush is no longer president it will all go away (unless of course another republican wins the presidency).

Scientists: What are we to do? Will it get warmer? Will it get chillier? What are we to do? Help us scientists, you with so many answers! Perhaps there is some evolutionary way we can stem the tide of this onslaught from that dastardly sun.

jerry