World's climate warming faster than feared, scientists say

[Ridgerunner]

Worth reading.

EL NIÑO/SOUTHERN OSCILLATION (ENSO) DIAGNOSTIC DISCUSSION

issued by

CLIMATE PREDICTION CENTER/NCEP/NWS
and the International Research Institute for Climate and Society
10 July 2014

ENSO Alert System Status: El Niño Watch

Synopsis: The chance of El Niño is about 70% during the Northern Hemisphere summer and is close to 80% during the fall and early winter.
During June 2014, above-average sea surface temperatures (SST) were most prominent in the eastern equatorial Pacific, with weakening evident near the International Date Line (Fig. 1). This weakening was reflected in a decrease to +0.3°C in the Niño-4 index (Fig. 2). The Niño-3.4 index remained around +0.5°C throughout the month, while the easternmost Niño-3 and Niño-1+2 indices are +1.0°C or greater. Subsurface heat content anomalies (averaged between 180º-100ºW) have decreased substantially since late March 2014 and are now near average (Fig. 3). However, above-average subsurface temperatures remain prevalent near the surface (down to 100m depth) in the eastern half of the Pacific (Fig. 4). The upper-level and low-level winds over the tropical Pacific remained near average, except for low-level westerly anomalies over the eastern Pacific. Convection was enhanced near and just west of the Date Line and over portions of Indonesia (Fig. 5). Still, the lack of a clear and consistent atmospheric response to the positive SSTs indicates ENSO-neutral.
Over the last month, no significant change was evident in the model forecasts of ENSO, with the majority of models indicating El Niño onset within June-August and continuing into early 2015

 

[onenow1]

Could it be cosmic warming. What now?

 

[Ridgerunner]

This is always interesting. It can change, but once a person gets past the spring and fall changes, it’s pretty accurate.

cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions//multi_season/13_seasonal_outlooks/color/churchill.php

 

[estesbob]

Long on claim.
Short on facts.

No explanation was provided in your reference.

Correct. And has been shown when their creative ways of estimating historic temperatures didn’t give them the answers they wanted they cooked the books. Tree rings evidently give accurate reading on temperature except when they show cooling

 

[Erich]

If all Americans had gotten on the solar bandwagon, incl passive solar (which basically means orientation of homes and buildings), in the 1970s when we had the peak oil concern, we’d be a lot closer to that 50 or 100 years before we can transition away from fossil fuels.

Attorney and mechanical engineer Peter W. Huber pointed out in 2006 that the world is just running out of “cheap oil.” As oil prices rise, unconventional sources become economically viable. He predicted that, “[t]he tar sands of Alberta alone contain enough hydrocarbon to fuel the entire planet for over 100 years.”

And, because this is a GW thread… environmental journalist George Monbiot proclaimed that there is more than enough oil (from unconventional sources) for capitalism to “deep-fry” the world with climate change.

The 1970s predictions for peak oil proved premature.

 

[lynnvinc]

Attorney and mechanical engineer Peter W. Huber pointed out in 2006 that the world is just running out of “cheap oil.” As oil prices rise, unconventional sources become economically viable. He predicted that, “[t]he tar sands of Alberta alone contain enough hydrocarbon to fuel the entire planet for over 100 years.”

That 100 yrs may be the long down-slope after the peak, I think. Unless the true cost is hidden in subsidies in order to squeeze out oil from the tar sands at a much faster rate, giving us a “false peak.”

I’m even thinking the rate on return for unsubsidized/no-tax-break tar sands oil (including the extensive pipelines, leaks from acidic bitumen, and paying damages (to at least some extent – they never pay full)) might drop below one dollar gained for one dollar spent. I think right now it’s about $2 gained for $1 spent.

IOW, maybe it might in the near future become a boondoggle, but they could always deflect public opinion away from this and onto terrorists or foreigners stealing jobs from the US and Canada, or such issues.

I think in the US we have a campaign to reduce or dummy down education so people won’t have any idea of what’s going on. The media are already pretty bad and complicit in this.

And, because this is a GW threat… environmental journalist George Monbiot proclaimed that there is more than enough oil (from unconventional sources) for capitalism to “deep-fry” the world with climate change.

That could be true, esp if we keep the public misinformed about the true costs of that difficult oil (including env harms).

However, I do know we have enough coal to fry the world, so to speak. And enough nukes to fry it 6 times over (or so the saying went).

This all reminds me when I was a kid building sand castles out on the beach. Some nasty boys would often come and destroy them. I think we have this terrible destruction streak in us – whether it is mainly a male thing, or a cultural (mainly US cultural) thing, or human nature (think Cain & Abel).

 

[lynnvinc]

This is always interesting. It can change, but once a person gets past the spring and fall changes, it’s pretty accurate.

cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions//multi_season/13_seasonal_outlooks/color/churchill.php

Looks like my area (RGV) will be below average during the winter months, when we could get a killing freeze or 2 to kill our winter gardens. Fiddle sticks!

 

[donsnow]

donsnow;12164052:

Good evening, gilliam,

I don’t have a weather station here, but I have made mental observations the previous two years. We’ve had weak cold fronts come in during the hot months here in Texas. It looks like it’s doing it again this year, too. I remember the little cold fronts cooling down the three digit temperature and thanking God for them.

/QUOTE]

I think we’re experiencing El Nino conditions. NOAA pretty much confirms it. It happens when high surface temps shift from the western Pacific to the Eastern Pacific. That high energy then crosses into the Gulf and creates fluctuating energy that brings warm air up, alternating with cooler northern air coming down. I have been paying attention to that for years and years, and gauge my hay-buying by it. When it’s El Nino, I put off buying until it gets cheaper. When it’s La Nina I buy the very first spring cuttings even though they can be more expensive. When it’s ENSO neutral, I buy it in pieces along. It’s always predictive.

Interestingly, looking at the historic data, the greatest effect seems to be in eastern Oklahoma just west of where I am.The favorable effect diminishes gradually as you go both east and west. But Dallas is not all that far west or south of eastern Ok, and you’re in the zone that’s favorably affected by El Nino…just not as dramatically.

Good afternoon, RidgeRunner,

I’d forgotten about EL NINO and LA NINA.

If you’re stating that El Nino causes the swing of the Jet Stream which brings cold weather down to North Central Texas, viva El Nino! Ever since my 2011 heat stroke, I get anxious in three digit temperatures. The cooling being favorable is plenty good, it doesn’t have to be dramatically.

God loves you,
Don

 

[donsnow]

This is always interesting. It can change, but once a person gets past the spring and fall changes, it’s pretty accurate.

cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/predictions//multi_season/13_seasonal_outlooks/color/churchill.php

Hi, again,

Thanks for the link.

The second set of maps were for precipitation. And, the mid to late months of 2015 look to be drought stricken.

God loves you,
Don

 

[lynnvinc]

Good afternoon, RidgeRunner,

I’d forgotten about EL NINO and LA NINA.

If you’re stating that El Nino causes the swing of the Jet Stream which brings cold weather down to North Central Texas, viva El Nino! Ever since my 2011 heat stroke, I get anxious in three digit temperatures. The cooling being favorable is plenty good, it doesn’t have to be dramatically.

God loves you,
Don

There are actually 7 such larger weather patterns, El Nino Southern Oscillation being one of them. See www2.ucar.edu/news/backgrounders/weather-maker-patterns-interactive-map#map

What may have also enhanced the heat wave in Texas in 2011 could have been a neg arctic oscillation – the same type that also brings cold weather down south. What it can do is create huge atmospheric waves, called Rossby Waves, which bring colder weather to some southern areas around the globe and pulls up hotter weather to other southern areas and makes it stall there for some time. It is the slow or stalling pattern that does more harm. See Climate Extremes and Rossby Waves at gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/seminars/archive/presentations/20110913SiegfriedSchubert.pdf (shows Texas 2011 on pg. 31).

http://i.space.com/images/i/000/015/980/i02/earth-rossby-waves.jpg?1332157871

 

[donsnow]

There are actually 7 such larger weather patterns, El Nino Southern Oscillation being one of them. See www2.ucar.edu/news/backgrounders/weather-maker-patterns-interactive-map#map

What may have also enhanced the heat wave in Texas in 2011 could have been a neg arctic oscillation – the same type that also brings cold weather down south. What it can do is create huge atmospheric waves, called Rossby Waves, which bring colder weather to some southern areas around the globe and pulls up hotter weather to other southern areas and makes it stall there for some time. It is the slow or stalling pattern that does more harm. See Climate Extremes and Rossby Waves at gmao.gsfc.nasa.gov/seminars/archive/presentations/20110913SiegfriedSchubert.pdf (shows Texas 2011 on pg. 31).

http://i.space.com/images/i/000/015/980/i02/earth-rossby-waves.jpg?1332157871

Good evening, lynnvinc,

Yes, there were over four weeks of three digit temperatures in North Central Texas in 2011. So, that was the year to not be without air conditioning (A/C). However: in 2006 I quit replacing window units stolen from off my house. I could stand the heat. I was raised in Texas before A/C. But, to repeat myself, 2011 was not the year to be without A/C and I wound up in the ER of a local hospital with heat exhaustion and heat stroke and was in ICU for three of the seven days I was hospitalized. The doctor said he would not send me home to a house without A/C. That’s when I found out who my friends were. I had an A/C installed the day after I got home, bought by a friend and installed by his family members.
But that heat wave did sit on Fort Worth for five or more weeks. It nice to understand what almost killed me. (I won’t go into the details of my ER condition).

Since that time, I have anxiety in three digit temperatures. I guess that’s PTSD from the heat exhaustion.

When climate change or meteorology is your personal passion, I’m sure it can be fascinating reading. However, it’s not my passion, even though it literally almost killed me. My passion is the slaughter of unborn American citizens.

God loves you,
Don

 

[lynnvinc]

When climate change or meteorology is your personal passion, I’m sure it can be fascinating reading. However, it’s not my passion, even though it literally almost killed me. My passion is the slaughter of unborn American citizens.

Pro-life is my passion and has been since I was a child growing up Protestant, only later converting to Catholicism. And that is precisely why I’m passionate about doing all I can to reduce my GHGs and other pollutants and work to save lives, both the born and unborn. (I participate in anti-abortion activities, as well.) I consider AGW to be the mother of pro-life issues. I’ll be vigorously banging my head against the brick wall of AGW skepticism until I die.

The only thing I can figure why anti-abortion people would want AGW to happen willy nilly, lickity-split is that if (along with all the other concomitant environmental harms and their knock-on effects) can kill off enough people, then that will virtually put an end to abortion. But somehow that doesn’t make any sense, and it just can’t be. It must be they just don’t understand what’s happening and all the ramifications. How can anyone be pro-life when it comes to medical abortions, but pro-death when it comes to environmental harms, including causing miscarriages? They just don’t understand – that is the only logical explanation.

To me, what is really alarming and scary are the anti-environmentalists and AGW skeptics, not AGW and environmental problems per se. I’m old and on my way out; I don’t fear for myself, but for others.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Ridgerunner;12168777:

Good afternoon, RidgeRunner,

I’d forgotten about EL NINO and LA NINA.

If you’re stating that El Nino causes the swing of the Jet Stream which brings cold weather down to North Central Texas, viva El Nino! Ever since my 2011 heat stroke, I get anxious in three digit temperatures. The cooling being favorable is plenty good, it doesn’t have to be dramatically.

God loves you,
Don

I have no pretense to being a meteorologist, and certainly not for North Central Texas. What I do know, and have experienced before, is that El Nino conditions during the summer and fall, bring cooler, wetter conditions to my part of the country, which is S.W. Mo. La Nina brings the opposite.

But in looking at the various maps, historically, it appears clear to me that the greatest positive effect is in eastern Oklahoma and SE Kansas. We’re adjacent to NE Ok, so we do get the effect, but not quite as much as, say, the “Green Country” of eastern OK. It is of interest that the effect falls away quickly, both east and west, so it might not have the same effect in No. Central Tx. I will add that El Nino seems to make the west coast hot, dry and subject to wildfires. So, somewhere between here and there, the effect is reversed.

Individuals’ reactions to heat are interesting and more varied than one would expect. So are one’s “heat shedding” physical responses. And it doesn’t seem to be particularly related to ethnicity, as some might argue. Long and interesting subject, but probably to untopical to discuss here.

 

[donsnow]

donsnow;12172301:

I have no pretense to being a meteorologist, and certainly not for North Central Texas. What I do know, and have experienced before, is that El Nino conditions during the summer and fall, bring cooler, wetter conditions to my part of the country, which is S.W. Mo. La Nina brings the opposite.

But in looking at the various maps, historically, it appears clear to me that the greatest positive effect is in eastern Oklahoma and SE Kansas. We’re adjacent to NE Ok, so we do get the effect, but not quite as much as, say, the “Green Country” of eastern OK. It is of interest that the effect falls away quickly, both east and west, so it might not have the same effect in No. Central Tx. I will add that El Nino seems to make the west coast hot, dry and subject to wildfires. So, somewhere between here and there, the effect is reversed.

Individuals’ reactions to heat are interesting and more varied than one would expect. So are one’s “heat shedding” physical responses. And it doesn’t seem to be particularly related to ethnicity, as some might argue. Long and interesting subject, but probably to untopical to discuss here.

Good afternoon, RidgeRunner,

Thank you for your post; I always enjoy them.

God loves you,
Don

 

[donsnow]

Pro-life is my passion and has been since I was a child growing up Protestant, only later converting to Catholicism. And that is precisely why I’m passionate about doing all I can to reduce my GHGs and other pollutants and work to save lives, both the born and unborn. (I participate in anti-abortion activities, as well.) I consider AGW to be the mother of pro-life issues. I’ll be vigorously banging my head against the brick wall of AGW skepticism until I die.

The only thing I can figure why anti-abortion people would want AGW to happen willy nilly, lickity-split is that if (along with all the other concomitant environmental harms and their knock-on effects) can kill off enough people, then that will virtually put an end to abortion. But somehow that doesn’t make any sense, and it just can’t be. It must be they just don’t understand what’s happening and all the ramifications. How can anyone be pro-life when it comes to medical abortions, but pro-death when it comes to environmental harms, including causing miscarriages? They just don’t understand – that is the only logical explanation.

To me, what is really alarming and scary are the anti-environmentalists and AGW skeptics, not AGW and environmental problems per se. I’m old and on my way out; I don’t fear for myself, but for others.

Good afternoon, lynnvinc,

Thank you for your post.

I find, even when we disagree, your posts as generally reasonable.

I have a literal mind, so I didn’t catch the satire in your sentence alluding that anti-abortion people want AGW to end the world to stop abortions. I guess that could be a morbid joke.

I’m pro-life, love the Catholic Churc and basically like science and love what left of America.

I’ll try to explain why I don’t relate fighting AGW to life saving.
Maybe, rather than try to rationalize this, I’d more likely keep a few shreds of your respect if I told the simple truth: I just can’t see it that way. I can give two reasons, for that lack of insight.

1)There are several geological features that could reduce all life on earth by 95%. These are supervolcanos As far as paleontologists know, the last supervolcano which was Toba, 70,000 years ago. The subsequent nuclear winter slew 95% of all life forms. I don’t know how many subterranean caldera (supervolcano) are on earth. I do know there are four of them in the continental USofA. So, with one explosion of one of these, I guess it would take a year or so, to have reduced the life on earth by 90% or more.
2.A solar flare could carry a magnetic field, that when it crosses over earth and mixes with our magnetic field, could cause a solar Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP). I don’t know how long it would take the solar flare EMP to cross over earth, but I know it’s not instantaneous, like a nuclear EMP. The solar EMP might have a few seconds duration, or few minutes. The thing is, most back up electric generators on earth come on instantly, when power is lost; an EMP effects only working electrical circuits. So, a solar EMP would knock out all working electrical circuits, and then also knock out the emergency generators which came instantly on, to back up the loss. And, loss of electricity would destroy our global civilization.

So, when I am knowledgeable that our world could end any time, instead of billions of years from now, somehow saving it from AGW is futile, if AGW is indeed a significant fact. Which, I don’t think it is. So, that’s why AGW doesn’t impress me.

So, like you, I work on what I can do in Christ to reduce the abortion rate. I think the abortion industry in America is our American Holocaust…

God loves you,
Don

 

[lynnvinc]

I’ll try to explain why I don’t relate fighting AGW to life saving.
Maybe, rather than try to rationalize this, I’d more likely keep a few shreds of your respect if I told the simple truth: I just can’t see it that way. I can give two reasons, for that lack of insight.

1)There are several geological features that could reduce all life on earth by 95%. These are supervolcanos As far as paleontologists know, the last supervolcano which was Toba, 70,000 years ago. The subsequent nuclear winter slew 95% of all life forms. I don’t know how many subterranean caldera (supervolcano) are on earth. I do know there are four of them in the continental USofA. So, with one explosion of one of these, I guess it would take a year or so, to have reduced the life on earth by 90% or more.
2.A solar flare could carry a magnetic field, that when it crosses over earth and mixes with our magnetic field, could cause a solar Electro Magnetic Pulse (EMP). I don’t know how long it would take the solar flare EMP to cross over earth, but I know it’s not instantaneous, like a nuclear EMP. The solar EMP might have a few seconds duration, or few minutes. The thing is, most back up electric generators on earth come on instantly, when power is lost; an EMP effects only working electrical circuits. So, a solar EMP would knock out all working electrical circuits, and then also knock out the emergency generators which came instantly on, to back up the loss. And, loss of electricity would destroy our global civilization.

So, when I am knowledgeable that our world could end any time, instead of billions of years from now, somehow saving it from AGW is futile, if AGW is indeed a significant fact. Which, I don’t think it is. So, that’s why AGW doesn’t impress me…

There is also the issue of our immortal souls. Natural disasters that could greatly reduce life on earth pose no harm to our souls. However, failing to take climate science seriously and mitigate the serious problem of AGW that is right now harming and killing people, and will be doing so much more in the future, could harm our souls. I’m not saying it would be a serious sin, tho perhaps striving to persuade others not to mitigate AGW could be somewhat more serious. It is perhaps a venial sin, since each person’s contribution is so small by comparison to the total GHG emissions, and it is a by-product of our regular activities. We don’t intend to harm.

At the time I was becoming a third order Carmelite in 1989-90 (OCDS), I was fairly circumspect about my sins and imperfections, and I think this is what led me to understand more deeply my responsibility regarding my contributions to AGW. I had been waiting for others to take the lead, for the government to do something about the problem. My mantra was “Why don’t they do something about this?” By God’s grace that changed to “I am contributing to the problem, I have to do something about it.”

At first I thought it would cost us, which seems to be the assumption of people here at CAF who have not engaged in mitigating AGW. Then little-by-little over the years I realized nearly everything we were doing was saving us money, not net costing. And my heart cried out, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and its righteousness, and all things will be added unto you!”

Finally, having lived prudently for nearly all our lives, living close to work and getting along with used cars, we bought a Chevy Volt in 2012, thinking this last car of ours a splurge, but getting it in order to help reduce our harm. We plug it into our electricity provided by Green Mountain 100% wind energy (and we got solar panels last year, as well, contributing about 43% of our electricity).

What we didn’t expect was the money we are saving on fuel, since a full charge for a 37 mile range only costs $1.23 in electricity. We figure we are saving about $1000 a year on it…and another $1000 a year on the solar panels. This is a great help for our upcoming retirement next year. We hadn’t thought of it that way, we were only trying to reduce our harm to others, but it just happened to work out that way.

My suggestion to those who might be shy of mitigating AGW is “be not afraid!”

 

[donsnow]

There is also the issue of our immortal souls. Natural disasters that could greatly reduce life on earth pose no harm to our souls. However, failing to take climate science seriously and mitigate the serious problem of AGW that is right now harming and killing people, and will be doing so much more in the future, could harm our souls. I’m not saying it would be a serious sin, tho perhaps striving to persuade others not to mitigate AGW could be somewhat more serious. It is perhaps a venial sin, since each person’s contribution is so small by comparison to the total GHG emissions, and it is a by-product of our regular activities. We don’t intend to harm.

At the time I was becoming a third order Carmelite in 1989-90 (OCDS), I was fairly circumspect about my sins and imperfections, and I think this is what led me to understand more deeply my responsibility regarding my contributions to AGW. I had been waiting for others to take the lead, for the government to do something about the problem. My mantra was “Why don’t they do something about this?” By God’s grace that changed to “I am contributing to the problem, I have to do something about it.”

At first I thought it would cost us, which seems to be the assumption of people here at CAF who have not engaged in mitigating AGW. Then little-by-little over the years I realized nearly everything we were doing was saving us money, not net costing. And my heart cried out, “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and its righteousness, and all things will be added unto you!”

Finally, having lived prudently for nearly all our lives, living close to work and getting along with used cars, we bought a Chevy Volt in 2012, thinking this last car of ours a splurge, but getting it in order to help reduce our harm. We plug it into our electricity provided by Green Mountain 100% wind energy (and we got solar panels last year, as well, contributing about 43% of our electricity).

What we didn’t expect was the money we are saving on fuel, since a full charge for a 37 mile range only costs $1.23 in electricity. We figure we are saving about $1000 a year on it…and another $1000 a year on the solar panels. This is a great help for our upcoming retirement next year. We hadn’t thought of it that way, we were only trying to reduce our harm to others, but it just happened to work out that way.

My suggestion to those who might be shy of mitigating AGW is “be not afraid!”

Good afternoon, Lynn,

You make a good case.

But, I will let Jesus Christ judge me, about whether or not I believe there is any significant warming caused by people and by our civilization. The kindest thing I can say for AGW is that it is overreaction.

I think that submarine volcanoes and ocean bottom volcanic vents are heating the oceans. Common sense tells me this. Warm ocean currents are seen to effect the climates of the land adjacent to them. The Gulf Stream goes out to sea and does not warm Newfoundland but does warm the UK. So, there’s an example, an anecdote if you will, of warm water warming the atmosphere over it.

So, I respectfully submit, that natural causes (sun; and volcanic activity via the oceans’ waters0 cause more global warming than we do. And, as long as AGW proponents choose to ignore or avoid mentioning these other warming sources, I suspect they are more liable to God’s judgement than we who doubt AGW are.

I’m glad that you’ve found economic green energy sources. I’m glad they are there for you.
I don’t have anything against green energy, except when it smears us AGW doubters.

God loves you,
Don

 

[Bill1940]

Don, Lynn et al: Whether to accept or reject an argument pro or con AGW is a matter of prudential judgment. There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that the alarmist position is unwarranted. It is also clear that non-fossil fuel generation of power is and will be for the foreseeable future inadequate in providing our needs. Nonetheless, frugality is virtuous and I commend you Lynn for your efforts. Electric cars are too expensive and a 37 mile range is unserviceable for most people but I commend you for, like Thoreau, making yourselves rich by keeping your wants small. I understand that the claimed 97% of scientists believing in AGW is based on a factitiously small sample. I also understand that 37,000 or so other scientists, engineers and related professionals have signed a contrariwise petition. An understanding of history instructs us that there were periods warmer than currently and during which the human race grew and prospered. Finally, the association of an alarmist AGW position with certain political and business interests should lead us to be circumspect, if not suspicious. God Bless you all and thank you for the opportunity to engage in a civil conversation on the subject.

 

[tomarin]

Individuals’ reactions to heat are interesting and more varied than one would expect. So are one’s “heat shedding” physical responses. And it doesn’t seem to be particularly related to ethnicity, as some might argue. Long and interesting subject, but probably to untopical to discuss here.

What are ‘heat shedding’ physical responses?

 

[lynnvinc]

Don, Lynn et al: Whether to accept or reject an argument pro or con AGW is a matter of prudential judgment. There is a substantial body of evidence indicating that the alarmist position is unwarranted. It is also clear that non-fossil fuel generation of power is and will be for the foreseeable future inadequate in providing our needs. Nonetheless, frugality is virtuous and I commend you Lynn for your efforts. Electric cars are too expensive and a 37 mile range is unserviceable for most people

I forgot to mention that the Chevy Volt does switch seamlessly over to a small gasoline tank for a motor to keep the battery charged, then gets about 40 miles per gallon.

Nearly all our driving is within that 37 mile range, however, so we don’t use much gas.

However, we did drive 380 mile to Houston to visit our niece in 2013, and since we got a very late start we drove inefficiently with the AC blasting and at 73 mph (it shows inefficient driving above 60 mph). We nearly made it on our initial charge and the 9.3 gallon tank, but had to stop for a refill of gas as we got closer to Houston. We could have made it all the way without stopping for gas if we had been driving efficiently.

I’d say the range is about 405, and then one just fills up with gas for another 370 range (sans the initial electric charge).

It is a really great car. One auto magazine stated that in creating the Chevy Volt the Detroit engineers in cheap suits outdid the Germans.

I understand that the claimed 97% of scientists believing in AGW is based on a factitiously small sample.

I don’t accept that claim either, because of the method. They should have just read all the articles in top-tier science journals to find out that 100% of climate scientists claim AGW is real.

I also understand that 37,000 or so other scientists, engineers and related professionals have signed a contrariwise petition.

That’s a totally bogus “study,” with characters from MAS*H, dentists and philosophy PhDs (with Dr. in the names), and all sorts of “arm chair” types who have never ever done studies of AGW. I wouldn’t go to a butcher for brain surgery, and I wouldn’t trust an engineer or astrophysicist (who does not do research and publish on AGW) for my information about AGW.

An understanding of history instructs us that there were periods warmer than currently and during which the human race grew and prospered.

Not really, plus there’s much more heating in the pipes and with our continued profligacy we’re headed toward perhaps 6C warming between 2100 & 2200. That is the amount of warming that killed off 95% of life on earth during the end-Permian extinction.

Finally, the association of an alarmist AGW position with certain political and business interests should lead us to be circumspect, if not suspicious.

Not sure what you mean. I’m just a simple Carmelite Catholic minding my own business, doing whatever I can in my daily life over the past 25 years to mitigate AGW. However, I also have to speak up on this issue of AGW.

Several years ago I was planning to give up talking about AGW, since the anti-environmentalist and AGW skeptics are so well entrenched there is absolutely nothing I can do or say to convince them AGW is real, dangerous, or that we need to mitigate. They don’t even want to follow JPII or BXVI admonition to mitigate AGW, so why would they listen to me. Then that Sunday at Mass the reading came that if you see your brother sinning, you must speak to him about it, otherwise the sin falls back on you.

So here I am endlessly pounding my head against a solid brick wall until the day I die.