… well, you know the rest.
This morning, while I was wandering around the ‘net during a brief break at work, I stumbled across the somewhat interesting news that Mars, the home of little green men, is actually undergoing its own version of "global warming" as we speak. In fact, oddly enough, it has had an overall temperature increase of about 0.5 degrees Celsius in the past 25 years – about the same as the Earth has had in the same period of time. As I said, a little odd. In fact, the scientists observing this are somewhat concerned that the southern ice cap of Mars might be melting, if not completely gone in relatively short order. Now, they are also theorizing that the mechanics of the temperature increase are a little different than what is probably going on here on the green planet (Why do the green men come from the red planet and not the green one?), but we all know what the problem is – the Martians obviously need to cut back on their use of greenhouse-gas-producing fuels, stop driving those SUVs, and only use one square of toilet paper at each restroom sitting.
Well, with this somewhat odd news in hand, I could not help but to needle the resident "global warming" fanatic at work with the news that another planet in the solar system was undergoing the same temperature increase in the same amount of time as Earth – obviously indicating that things outside of both planetary body’s atmospheres are influencing their surface temperatures. At least, it is obvious to anyone who has not bought completely into the "global warming" death cult. Suffice it to say, this particular individual at work has. Anywise, the "discussion" we had was somewhat entertaining (at least from my aspect), and was completely frought with the typical talking points, but one particular thing blew my mind (other than his adamant belief in something that is a theory at best, and a pipe dream at worst). This individual, a relatively intelligent young man (despite his odd beliefs), was completely unaware of the campaign the "global warming" adherents are waging against those who would speak out against them. In fact, after trying to explain to him the situation and why it was that way, I was immediately interrupted, spoken over, and explained-to just how much of a conspiracy theorist I was, and how ludicrous I sounded.
Well, the conversation ended… to the point where he told me he does not want to talk about "global warming" with me ever again – I would consider that a victory, though he undoubtedly does as well. I did a little more poking around the ‘net (very slow day today), and happened to stumble across this remarkably opportune article.
Scientists who dissent from the alarmism have seen their grant funds disappear, their work derided, and themselves libeled as industry stooges, scientific hacks or worse. Consequently, lies about climate change gain credence even when they fly in the face of the science that supposedly is their basis.
And the real beauty of this particular article? It was written by Mr. Richard Lindzen – a Professor of Atmospheric and Planetary Sciences at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (otherwise known as the "Georgia Tech of the North", and rightfully so). This is even better, since the "global warming" cultist from this morning had a tremendous amount of difficulty accepting anything that did not meet with his viewpoint of the world, even when they are as well sourced as some of the JunkScience articles. Of course, I have not presented the local cultist with this information yet… all things considered, I would take it as a kindness if he kept his word.
However, before you, in turn, go about spouting off on how Mr. Lindzen would have no idea what he is talking about, it turns out he actually has first-hand experience:
And then there are the peculiar standards in place in scientific journals for articles submitted by those who raise questions about accepted climate wisdom. At Science and Nature, such papers are commonly refused without review as being without interest. However, even when such papers are published, standards shift. When I, with some colleagues at NASA, attempted to determine how clouds behave under varying temperatures, we discovered what we called an "Iris Effect," wherein upper-level cirrus clouds contracted with increased temperature, providing a very strong negative climate feedback sufficient to greatly reduce the response to increasing CO2. Normally, criticism of papers appears in the form of letters to the journal to which the original authors can respond immediately. However, in this case (and others) a flurry of hastily prepared papers appeared, claiming errors in our study, with our responses delayed months and longer. The delay permitted our paper to be commonly referred to as "discredited." Indeed, there is a strange reluctance to actually find out how climate really behaves. In 2003, when the draft of the U.S. National Climate Plan urged a high priority for improving our knowledge of climate sensitivity, the National Research Council instead urged support to look at the impacts of the warming–not whether it would actually happen.
So, yeah, another planet (in fact, quite a few celestial bodies) in the solar system is undergoing temperature increases… without any obvious human (or other sentient) presence on it. And right after I get yelled at for being a conspiracy theorist by asserting that "global warming" cultists are silencing those who would speak out against them, I turn up an article written by someone who would know… explaining just that.
Coincidence? Hm.
Hat tip to Cao.
recent comments