In the past month, the House Minority Leader called the idea that carbon dioxide - a greenhouse gas and known carcinogen - is dangerous "almost comical," and members of his party suggested that the planet is actually cooling and "carbon-starved" and invited a global warming denier as a public witness to a Congressional hearing on the topic.
As anyone with experience with recovery knows, the first step in addressing a crisis is to admit that you have a problem. Unfortunately, these displays and others make it increasingly clear that, despite conclusive scientific evidence on the existence of global warming and the human role, some elected officials refuse to take Step 1.
As Congress begins the process of legislating to protect humans and ecosystems from the effects of global warming, I believe we need a "temperature check."
Today - Earth Day - I introduced a resolution that says three very simple things critical to a constructive dialogue on global warming:
(1) The Earth is warming;
(2) Human activity plays large role in that warming;
(3) Congress can mitigate the risks through legislation.
The first two - recognizing the existence of global warming and the role of human activity - are not controversial. They have been proven by countless scientific and peer-reviewed studies and accepted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the National Academies of Sciences, and numerous scientific organizations.
Accepting the third premise acknowledges that we can and must do something about it.
On an issue so vital to the sustainability of our planet, we cannot afford for those who are unwilling to take Step 1 based on political ideology to stall progress on addressing global climate change. This resolution will be a good indication of who is willing to admit we have a problem.
http://www.pewclimate.org/press-release/10year
My apologies to those who already knew.
Offering a resolution that says "the earth is warming" doesn't itself make its so. Further, the statement is false. The earth has not warmed since 1998. Also, the global air temperature in 2008 was considerably lower than 1998, and this year is only very marginally warmer than 2008. So we are currently living in a cooler world than we were in 1998.
Besides air temperature measurements, there are other recent signs in nature that the earth is not warming, if you would only look for them. The oceans have stopped warming, and the rate of sea level rise has slowed down since 1998. Warm water expands; cooler water contracts.
Also, our sun has been gradually moving into a very cool phase, which in the past has been associated with much cooler weather on earth. Some scientists are forecasting a couple of decades of cooling weather ahead.
It is not wise to tease mother nature, by stating "the earth is warming" when it is not. It may be prudent for the government to prepare for the real possibility of a cooler climate ahead, instead of denying the reality of the situation.
And since we have only the one, would you want to destroy it if there is the slightest chance the theory is correct? Look at the outcomes in all scenarios and the reasonable person would conclude that it certainly does no harm (whether the theory is right or wrong) to lower the CO2 levels. Those that use the argument of economics are trying to put the importance of humans above that of the planet - kind of like saying the sun revolves around the earth as they did in the middle ages.
And I would suggest that there is a huge difference in the experimental science used to validate the theories you mention, and the observational science that is used to support the sometimes outlandish claims about global warming. Climate scientists cannot even agree on the effect of water vapor on climate, and water vapor is a massively greater "greenhouse gas" than CO2. I would strongly recommend a book called "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming." Read it, cover to cover, check the references listed, and see if you feel the same way.
Relativity has oodles of direct empirical evidence to prove it. Check out the experiments with atomic clocks and talk to any astrophycisist about gravity lensing.
Newton's theory of gravity is merely a very good approximation. It also has oodles of direct empirical evidence to support it. Relativity is merely a more accurate description.
This is exactly what the problem is... ignorant, uneducated, and highly opinionated people that dont realize there is far, far more science going on in the world than what they read about on Huffpost "Green" section.
The point where you think you know everything, is the point where you know nothing.
Be the Change you want to see and stop waiting for our corrupt gov't to do something.
Many people don't remember that you used to be able to smoke in theaters, buses, airplanes, trains and when anyone tried to create legislation to forbid smoking in those areas the Council for Tobacco Research, the Tobacco Institute and the Tobacco lobbyists would make sure to derail the legislation.
It's the same now with climate change. Instead of working together to fix things, they trot out the "Tobacco Institute scientists" and cloud the issue with whether everyone believes in Climate Change.
Not everyone believes the earth is round, that there was a moon landing or in organ transplants. But we don't kowtow to those people when we talk about the earth's circumference, the space program or surgical training. Why we kowtow to the deniers of climate change is beyond me.
Carbon Dioxide is 0.00038 of our atmosphere. It is a TRACE GAS. If global warming is occuring, water vapor is far more important in that process as a greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. Will Congress next propose to regulate water vapor? Legislate the cloud formations? That's how silly this entire debate is, and you are willing to crush our economy under horrendous cap and trade taxes, yes, taxes, simply to support massive government. I beg you to educate yourself about this fraud. Read some of the writings of the increasing number of scientists who strenuously refute this nonsense. You owe it to your country and your constiutents not to blindly follow Al Gore off the cliff.
Please Rep Lowey check the facts for yourself . I challenge you to answer the following points here on this thread.The best indication of global temperature trends is the Hadley Centre global SST data base. Anybody reading this can check for themselves - Google - Hadley Cru and scroll down to the SST global data.It shows the following:
1. The earth has been cooling since 2003.
2. The warmest year was 1998.
3.2008 was cooler than 1997 - 11 years with CO2 rising 6% and no net warming in contradiction to The IPCC models and Al Gores fearmongering predictions.
The geological record shows that the sun is the main climate driver - check the C14 and Be10 record. - Anthropogenic CO2 plays only a minor role in global temperature trends.
Solar studies and data - in particular the non development of Solar cycle 24 suggest that we may be entering a 30 year cooling phase - either a Dalton or even Maunder minimum. A similar cooling trend is also suggested by the PDO.
CO2 is the essential plant food - not a pollutant .If the suggested cooling trend appears we would need more CO2 not less in order to help maintain food crop production on a cooler planet.
As to Lowy's point three - it is total nonsense - Even if the USA shut down the economy completely the ensuing temperature drop would be
Wouldn't it be a GOOD thing for America to get off of foreign oil and be able to produce renewable energy here in our own country???????
I think most Americans would agree that not having to import ridiculous amounts of oil from countries like Saudi Arabia would be a step in the right direction.
Don't you??
I read a previous article on HuffPo about a Spanish Company building solar farms having trouble getting water for their project. How is this making us "energy independent"?
Put solar panels on your house and a wind generator in your yard and eliminate the corporations from the utilities.
Renewable energy will never be anything more than a supplement. Look at the data on wind and solar. It's not reliable enough to power the grid. If we really want to get off foreign oil, why aren't we using our own?
http://www.grist.org/article/global-warming-stopped-in-1998
Point 2:
http://www.grist.org/article/there-is-no-consensus
Your third point is outside my purview, but if the first two are any indication, I would assume you are wrong about that as well.
A bigger point as it relates to general gobal polution, is that if Nature does not provide our basic elements in contaminated form, why should we accept contamination as just part of "doing business"?
The truth of a thing lies only in its pursuit, not in its attainment.
Start reading. Report back to us when you are done.