I'm a global warming skeptic. I acknowledge that I may be wrong. My question is how long will it be before the question is resolved? If the global warming zealots win the day, and we move down the path of carbon taxes and encouraging low emissions vehicles, but these zealots are wrong . . . then things will keep getting warmer and climate change will not be averted. Alternately, global warming itself, independently of "cause," may not be occuring. At what point is the "global warming is caused by human behavior" hypothesis proven false? Is it possible for this hypothesis to be proven false? What would the proof look like? At what point is the "global warming is occuring" hypothesis proven false?
Basically I continue to hear stories ofcountervailing information that suggests to me that the maturity of the science is not complete. It only takes a little bit of digging and scratching in most areas of science to find out that an amazing amount of knowledge and understanding exists. Start reading a little about signal processing, statistical analysis of wireless transmission channels, information theory and find out how much work and analysis has been done. Freaking amazing. On the other hand, in the global warming debate I find things like (1) global warming is occuring because the snow cap on Mount Kilimanjaro is melting and (2) au contraire, the snow cap on Mount Kilimanjaro is always melting, but this snow cap is being reduced in extent by the reduced snowfalls that are the resultof changes inlocal land use behaviors (cutting down trees or something such as that). Again, (1) global warming is occuring because the ice sheet in Iceland is being reduced in extent and (2) wait a minute, ice sheet #1 in Iceland is being reduced in extent but ice sheet #2 in Iceland is growing in extent. These circumstances do not bespeak substantive knowledge. So . . . what is the scenario under which true knowledge emerges and the arguments are settled? How long will this be?
I have noticed that our European cousins seem to be, generally, more disposed to buy into the "global warming is caused by human behavior" hypothesis and view the reluctance of Americans to buy-in as further evidence of our lack of culture, our generally low caliber of education, our degenerate condition. How far inthe future will a definite conclusion be reached?
There will never be a definitive conclusion because there are too many variables involved. As just one example, what time scale do you use?; the history of the planet, since recorded history, the last 100 years, or the last decade? And then, what time frame are you using to project possible trends into the future? Its a crap shoot. And, as long as partisan politics are entangled with science, you won't likely get consensus either.
__________________
"Shoot him again....his soul is still dancing"
Follow the money. Those who profit from the notion of Human Caused Global Warming are its biggest proponents. Al Gore makes thousands from his movie, speaking engagements, and investment firm...
Have you heard of that one? You know the "carbon offsets" that Gore buys in order to offset his polluting lifestyle? Well, he buys them from himself!
He started a brokerage firm that puts together environmentally friendly portfolios. To cover your polluting arse, you invest in his company, and that makes it all better. The more people he suckers into the carbon offsetting scam via global warming, the more his fledgling business will flourish. Just wait until carbon offsetting is as common a business as utilities, and see how much moneyentrepenuers like Gore make off of it.
When will warming dispute be resolved?
