The topic Global Warming/Climate Change has hit the world press once again. The Daily Telegraph of a recent issue of change in a climatic condition now reads: ‘’Global Warming? No,  Global  Cooling actually, say Scientists at this time.”

There has been an increase in the amount of Ocean Ice by 29% compared to last year this time, adding 533,000 square miles, not to include many British Climate scientists and the Russian scientists, whose frigidity to each other must add to the ice.

What is the true situation among these complex reports? Firstly I need to make some definitions.

Climate Change is a separate concept  to Global Warming. Climate changes all the time, from day to day, from simple to severe. Further, it gets hotter from Cold to Hot, and from Windy to Still.  So the terminology “Climate Change” is somewhat misleading when it portrays some unusual events relating to the changes in weather. There are always changes in weather.

The operative term in this situation is ‘’Global Warming’’, that is more accurate. There have a few recent efforts to update the Global Warming situation, and many scientists all over the world are trying to find the correct answer, but there is no history, or adequate experience to draw conclusions. Some experts think the world might be approaching a period as in the mid 60’s, when there was a clear cooling trend, or perhaps the start of a cyclical phenomenon.

 Some scientists believe a new ice age is imminent; IPCC scientists think that a virtual “pause” in warming is being experienced, and will last fifteen years. (Daily Telegraph). Yet others believe the warming has stopped.

The fact is that this conflicting Climate behaviour has no scientific explanation, and there is not enough supporting data to make concise predictions. The age of the earth is thousands of years, so how can data that stretches fifty to one hundred years be relevant to the entire cycle of the earth’s existence? There are not enough long trends to suggest a pattern of behaviour, nor was anyone around in history that had collected Warming data.

The IPCC (International Panel of Climate Concern) reports:

(i)  Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia.”

Although the evidence is thin, there is indicated that almost certainly climate scientists agree with the first part. However, the phrasing of second part is so vague (“many of the observed changes” and “decades to millennia”) as to be almost meaningless. So scientists’ opinion, even if available, would be of little value.

(ii)  “It is extremely likely that human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”

Human influence on the climate was specifically covered by all the above studies. However, none consulted a representative sample of scientists and even the commonly held view that climate scientists agree that mankind has made a significant contribution to global warming is essentially meaningless.

(iii)  “Continued emissions of greenhouse gases will cause further warming and changes in all components of the climate system. Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions of greenhouse gas emissions.”

    These difficulties and uncertainties largely stem from the fact that the only way to establish a satisfactory answer would be to conduct a worldwide, properly constructed and correctly implemented survey unambiguously covering all these main findings. The meteorological survey and especially the Bray and von Storch survey got closest to this. But not entirely: for example, Bray and von Storch didn’t cover the findings; its sample was inadequate and the study does not seem to have resolved an expertise problem (Meaning there is no recognized expert in this field so data could not be extrapolated).

    In summary, the inadequacy of useful evidence means that the extent to which the report reflects climate scientists’ views is both unknown and likely to continue to be unknown. Therefore it’s impossible to provide a reliable answer to the Committee’s question. However, such evidence as does exist indicates that the answer would probably be that IPCC reflects the range of views among climate scientists to only a very limited extent. ( Robin Guenier, M.A. (Oxon),BARRISTER, Summary).

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: