My Turn: Beware climate catastrophe charlatans
The Monitor is correct in asking when the tipping point on “climate change” will be reached (editorial, Aug. 21). But the editors fail to understand the real tipping point we should be asking about is this: When are we going to say enough to the climate catastrophe charlatans?
The science of the atmosphere, the sun, the oceans and everything else that affects our climate is incredibly incomplete. How incomplete? One of the biggest impacts on global climate over seasonal and annual time periods is the El Nino Southern Oscillation – an indicator of the changes in temperatures over the tropical Pacific. We have all heard of El Nino and how it can have major effects on temperatures and precipitation around the globe. What most people don’t know is that none of the climate models are capable of forecasting this effect even a year in advance, never mind the 100-year forecasts. If climate models cannot properly represent these climate effects (as well as other major climate elements) even over short time periods, why do we think they can forecast climate for the next century? They can’t.
The reality is that the models that drive climate hysteria have failed after only a few dozen years of forecasting. These models are the basis for all the claims of temperature increases, loss of ice, loss of snow, sea level rise, hurricane forecasts and every other scare tactic in the fraudsters’ book. The circulated drafts of the upcoming Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report have charts that show the poor track record of the models, but unfortunately the climate change industry (the same industry that writes the IPCC reports) will tuck this information away in a dark corner and not discuss either the data or the implications of this uncomfortable fact.
What is disappointing is not just that we have an entire industry whose existence relies on a lack of critical discussion about the foundations of its theories. The real tragedy is that our elected officials and other institutions have refused to talk about the real issues, or do not understand enough about the climate to have a discussion – yet still parrot out the scare tactics. This was driven home in the recent reporting of the dialogue at Saint Anselm College on green jobs. Asked about how believers should address questions about climate change, Cameron Wake of the University of New Hampshire said, “Don’t get bogged down in debating the science.” Why would he say this? Because the “science” arguments are running into the brick wall of real data, and real science that calls into question the underlying premises.
For example, has the Monitor looked at the models that are the foundation of all these predictions and questioned why current global temperatures haven’t risen in more than 15 years? Has it questioned why current temperatures are beyond the range of uncertainty of the models? Has it asked why we should put faith in global models that don’t understand the impact of the sun (by far the largest engine of heat and energy for the planet), the link between the oceans and the atmosphere, ocean temperature patterns and other major climate drivers? How then, given this track record, can the IPCC, Iowa state Sen. Rob Hogg, Cameron Wake or the Concord Monitor claim 95 percent certainty in anything having to do with our climate?
The second derivative of this lack of critical thinking is that most “climate change” studies are based on the outputs of these models. Any responsible elected official, bureaucrat or newspaper should ask the purveyors of this material this: “If the models are clearly flawed and are making projections that are already beyond acceptable error ranges, why should we give any weight to a study based on the model outcomes?” The logical, responsible answer is that they shouldn’t. Unless there can be better modeling and proven understanding of how our climate is impacted by the sun, ocean patterns and myriad other factors, then climate catastrophe stories should be relegated to the trash. That this material is used for setting policy at the state and national level is just another travesty thrust upon us by these con artists.
There will no doubt be theories, adjustments and other excuses as to why this “delay in warming” is due to mankind, why the models aren’t working, why we should still be scared. They are only theories and excuses. The climate changes. That is a fact. Exactly how and why is still unknown. Anyone who tells you differently is selling you snake oil and taking your money.
Unfortunately for all of us, climate scientists, (and the catastrophe charlatans who make money off their efforts) suffer from the hubris of not admitting what they do not know. The rest of mankind is suffering from it.
(Michael Sununu of Newfields is an owner and consultant at Sununu Enterprises LLC, a strategic consulting group that specializes in water, telecommunications, energy and infrastructure projects.)