The only constant in global warming debate: Do something now!

The Oklahoman Editorial Modified: September 6, 2013 at 6:29 pm •  Published: September 8, 2013
Advertisement
;

MAN-MADE global warming: Is there anything it can't do? We ask because global warming is blamed for summer heat and winter cold, severe drought and excessive rain, wildfires and floods, animal population decreases and overpopulation, and just about every other event occurring in nature both big and small.

The only constant in the debate over global warming is not its ever-changing alleged outcomes, but the demand that we “do something now!” in response. Usually that “something” requires citizens to spend more money for a lower quality of life in exchange for a promised future that will somehow, some way, be better.

Take a recent study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. It concludes that man-made global warming could actually reduce the chance of freak atmospheric steering currents like those that moved Superstorm Sandy into New Jersey last year. Yet Columbia University atmospheric scientist Adam Sobel, a co-author of the study, told The Associated Press, “There's nothing to get complacent about coming out of this research.”

Seriously? Sandy was already considered a once in 700 years storm. Now research suggests it may become even less likely thanks to climate change. Yet that's not reason for lowering alarm levels?

Instead, Sobel insists sea level rise and stronger storms will become worse due to global warming, offsetting the benefits of fewer Hurricane Sandys.

This may sound nonsensical to the average person, but “white is really black” conclusions are all too common in the realm of climate change. A new paper by Richard S. Lindzen, professor emeritus of atmospheric sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, suggests why this is so.

In the Journal of American Physicians and Surgeons, Lindzen notes that “today science almost inevitably requires outside funding” and the government often “has essentially a monopoly on such funding.” Thus, expanded funding “is eagerly sought, but the expansion of funding inevitably invites rent-seeking by scientists, university administration and government bureaucracies.”

| |

Advertisement


Trending Now



AROUND THE WEB

  1. 1
    Oldest living former MLB player dies at 102
  2. 2
    Oklahoma football: Bob Stoops stops by Kentucky practice
  3. 3
    Grizzlies' Courtney Lee says Memphis likes Westbrook taking shots
  4. 4
    Teens squeeze an invention from watery ketchup
  5. 5
    Boy saves for Playstation, then gives money away
+ show more