egy cikk a 2010. novemberi Worldoil-ból...

Global warming may be questionable, but climate change may nevertheless
produce worrisome impacts in the coming decades.
Anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory hypothesizes that the climate
is getting warmer and that humans are responsible. However, the hypotheses
on which AGW rest are widely contested by scientists. These hypotheses are based
on complex computer models projecting climate impacts a century into the
future-models that have been notably inaccurate in forecasting climate trends
of the past decade.
Many studies have found the scientific evidence for AGW lacking, one of the
more compelling of these being a paper by University of Pennsylvania law professor
Jason Johnston, "Global warming advocacy science: A cross examination,"
published in May of this year. It analyzed the major tenets of AGW theory and
found them to be questionable. The paper concluded that the Intergovernmental
Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and AGW scientists concealed fundamental
scientific uncertainties and disagreements and created widespread misimpressions
that have serious policy consequences.
Examining some of the major "proofs" of AGW indicates their tenuousness:
Global temperatures. Temperatures have been flat or declining over the past
decade, but that was not supposed to happen because CO2 concentrations
have increased. AGW proponents now contend that this is within the bounds
of model expectations, although they did not make that claim earlier. Further,
temperatures during the Medieval Warm period were significantly warmer than
currently. Finally, global temperatures declined from 1940 to the late 1970sand
by then many of today's AGW experts were warning of global cooling.
Ice caps. AGW proponents contend that rapid melting is occurring. However,
ice coverage data are only available back to the late 1970s, and the Northwest
Passage has been open before. They stated that observed cooling in Antarcrica
was consistent with global climate models-,until recent studies found that
It wasnt.
Hurricanes. Hurricane Katrina is cited as an example of what AGW portends.
However, Katrina made landfall as a category 3 storm in a city built below
sea level with faulty levees. Stronger storms have stuck before, and the most
destructive hurricane to strike the US was the 1927 Miami hurricane, well before
AGW Since the 1990s, hurricane activity has been decreasing, which contradicts
AGW theory.
The sun. The late 20th century experienced a major solar activity maximum
period, which is now ending, and the correlation between solar activity and
earth temperatures is remarkably strong.
Religious intolerance. AGW advocates contend that we should not question
the "settled science" due to the moral imperative of saving the planet, and
the AGW establishment has attempted to silence critics by withholding funding
and preventing their publication in peer-reviewed journals. This behavior is
more indicative of religious fervor than scientific debate.
In the 1990s when US temperatures rose, it was blamed on AGW Last winter,
the US experienced record-breaking snow and cold, and the past decade saw
flat or declining global temperatures.
AGW believers contend that these contradictory phenomena are manifestations
of global warming. Some even now contend that any type of weather is proof
of global warming. AGW advocates have even changed the nomenclature: "Global
warming" has been replaced by "global climate disruption." Thus, any weather
event is "proof" of their claims.
AGW advocates contend that there is 100% agreement among scientists, but
this is not true. In 1999, a petition was circulated criticizing AGW theory. The
cover letter was prepared by Dr..Frederick Seitz, past president of the US National
Academy of Sciences and Nobel Prize winner in physics, and the petition
was signed by more than 31,000 scientists- 12 times the number of scientific
reviewers in the IPCC.
Climate change to worry about.
Evidence indicates that the climate may be cooling over the next several decades,
rather than warming. This has worrisome implications. The last time the
world faced this, centuries ago, the impacts were devastating.
Global cooling would delay the start of the planting season in the spring and
produce early frosts in the fall, limiting food production. The cold during
the Little Ice Age brought massive crop failures, food riots, famine and disease,
and was one of the causal factors of the French Revolution. Global cooling could
disrupt the major grain producing areas of the Northern Hemisphere. Agriculture
is highly petrochemical intensive, and to maintain or expand harvests in the face
of global cooling would require more oil, natural gas and other energy resources.
More generally, constraints on fossil fuel production would be much more
serious in an era of global cooling than in one of global warming. Colder, longer
winters would require greater quantities of energy to ensure livability, and
transportation-by vehicle, train, boat, or airplane-in a colder climate is more
difficult and energy intensive.
If we are facing the onset of a global cooling cycle, the implications are serious.
The danger is not a science fiction fantasy of giant glaciers burying New
York and London, but rather relatively minor temperature declines that can have
devastating economic, agricultural and health effects. It is impossible to assign
probabilities and I am not recommending- as do AGW advocates-expenditures
of hundreds of trillions of dollars on dubious remedial programs. Rather, I
here raise the issue and recommend that research be devoted to it. If global cooling
is a potentially serious future threat, then much of the resources devoted to
AGW may have been wasted. WO

Dr. Roger Bezdek is an internationally recognized
energy analyst and President of Management
Information Services Inc. D.C. He has 30
years' experience in research and management
in the energy, utility, environmental and regulatory
areas, serving in industry, academia and the
federal government. His most recent book, The
Impending World Energy Mess, written with
Robert L. Hirsch and Robert M. Wendling, was
published in October '2010. The present column
draws heavily from the book's 17th chapter.