Collegiate Times

Conveniently overlooked by global warming alarmists, the sun may very well be the most significant factor in changes in our planet's climate. Sami Solanki, Director of the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany states, "The Sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures." Increases and decreases in solar activity also seem to correspond with warming and cooling periods throughout the last 1,000 years.

Putting this debate in perspective, the Earth is around 4.5 billion years old and has constantly undergone numerous fluctuations from ice ages to warming periods. Are we to believe the climate is static and humans are responsible for damaging the world beyond repair in a century's time?

There is no consensus on global warming. Over 60 respected scientists signed a letter to the Canadian Prime Minister this past April contending that "Global climate changes occur all the time due to natural causes and the human impact still remains impossible to distinguish from this natural 'noise.'" Between 1999 and 2001, thousands of scientists and researchers signed the Oregon Petition, stating, "There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."

Further, making the point about the myth of consensus, the Collegiate Times ran a story last week quoting a student, who had attended Al Gore's Climate Training Project, as saying of her experience, "It puts into perspective both sides of the argument, but there's no argument in the global scientific community."

Nothing could be further from the truth. William Gray of the Atmospheric Science Department at Colorado State University argues the notion of consensus is "one of the greatest hoaxes ever perpetrated on the American people."

A very strong case can be made concerning the sun's role in climate change, and numerous questions exist about the very foundations of man-made global warming theory. Why is it that proponents of global warming alarmism simply dismiss their critics? After all, if their theory were strong, wouldn't having it challenged only make it stronger?Then again, this debate clearly encompasses far more than just science. The politicization of this debate merits serious discussion, and will be examined in this column next week.

Continue Reading:  « Previous12