You have to hand it to the global warming crowd. A little cold and snow doesnt scare them one bit.
Here in Northwest Montana we recently received good news when it was announced that our local ski resorts are having record years for snowfall. The Whitefish Mountain Resort, for instance, had gotten 424 inches of snow at the summit as of April 4, a hefty improvement over the previous record of 406 inches, which was set in the 1996-97 season.
Thats not proof that there is no global warming under way, of course. But considering that snow records have been kept at Whitefish for well over 50 years, its at least a pretty good indication that theres no need to panic about local warming just yet. In fact, its entirely possible that the generally warming temperatures of the past 20 years are part of a cyclical change that is not man-caused at all. Everyone knows that the alpine glaciers in Glacier National Park are diminishing, but no one can prove that the melting ice isnt part of the same trend that pushed the planet out of the last ice age 12,000 years ago.
Most of the evidence for global warming, in fact, is based on computer modeling, where scientists try to predict or explain weather phenomena by entering known data into a computer program and then analyzing the results. The analysis is generally (but not always) scientific and reputable and makes sense, but the problem is that known data about climate is infinitesimally small compared to the billions-year-old dynamic systems known as Earth and the Solar System. That leaves room for error, even if hard-core global-warming proponents such as Al Gore say there is no room for doubt.
Similar scientific certainties based on known data have littered the dust bins of history since man first started trying to understand the world around him. Among them were the certainty that decaying meat spontaneously generates maggots and flies, and the certainty that the sun revolves around the earth. I suppose that as a matter of faith some trusting souls may believe modern science is incapable of such errors, but that is a risky proposition indeed when you consider that modern science is an invention of the somewhat error-prone modern man.
Other people, such as myself, believe that all data and analysis is welcome in our attempts to understand our planet, our universe and ourselves. As long as people dont become married to their theories and reject any new suitors from the realms of common sense, logic and observation, there is always the chance to refine and improve theories so that they more and more closely resemble the truth.
Thus, once again, I record some news in this column which might at least be part of what people consider before they accept global warming as a fait accompli. That news ranges from the amusing to the tragic.
In the amusing category, consider that International Falls, Minn., the city which just won a federal trademark as The Icebox of the Nation, set a record low temperature of 40 degrees below zero on Feb. 11 of this year. The previous record low in International Falls was minus 37. Not conclusive certainly that warming is not a huge danger, but intriguing nonetheless. (Unless you have your mind made up that everything is getting warmer. Then any evidence to the contrary can be neatly labeled as an anomaly and ignored.)
Regarding tragedy, we can look to South Asia, which suffered its lowest temperatures in 70 years this winter. More than 1,500 deaths were reported in Afghanistan alone, and many more occurred in Bangladesh, Nepal, Pakistan and other Asian countries.
Everyone remembers the pictures out of China in February when millions of travelers were stranded as they tried to make their way home for the Chinese New Year festival. More than 100 died, although it is hard to pin the Chinese government down on these numbers.
One thing that is clear is that, according to Reuters, the Chinese Meteorological Administration announced that the weather was the coldest in 100 years in central Hubei and Hunan provinces. And ultimately, according to a story in the Sunday Telegraph of London, the cold weather and accompanying snow resulted in the northern hemispheres greatest snow cover since 1966. It was also the coolest winter globally since 2001, according to the National Climatic Data Center.
But, of course, this kind of data doesnt deter proponents of manmade global warming who appear to be more interested in using peoples fears of catastrophe to accomplish sweeping and costly social reforms than in pursuing a calm and rational discussion of the science involved. Besides, its not global warming, we are now told rather, its climate change. All varieties welcome.
Nor does the evidence amassed by global warming proponents necessarily reach any higher standard of significance than the anecdotal evidence I have presented here, at least in many cases. A famous example was found last year when a picture of two forlorn polar bears stranded on a melting iceberg was shipped round the world to demonstrate the plight of the animal world as a result of mankinds heedless industrialization. It certainly touched the heartstrings, didnt it?
But as we now know, thanks to a Canadian journalist (NewsWith Views.com) the picture of the polar bears was taken in 2004 by a marine biologist named Amanda Byrd, who said the polar bears were not in any danger and that bears typically swim to icebergs and back to the mainland on a regular basis. No news. No tragedy. Just another example of climate extremists trying to create a sense of terror in the general populace. (No better example of this could be found than Ted Turners goofy comments last week that within 30 to 40 years, Most of the people will have died and the rest of us will be cannibals as a result of global warming.)
As for polar bears, they are a strange choice to make the case for the harmful effects of global warming. After all, the polar bear population has been increasing in recent decades. But that didnt stop the federal government from commissioning two studies to justify its plan to add the polar bears to the threatened or endangered species list, and conveniently those studies predicted a sharp downturn in polar bear numbers in the future.
This year, however, three scientists did an audit of the government-sponsored forecasts and concluded that the government forecasters followed fewer than one-sixth of the relevant principles of scientific forecasting. Their new study will be published in the management science journal Interfaces and has been peer reviewed. That should be reassuring to Al Gore, and maybe will convince him to stop using the polar bear picture in his traveling slide show and circus of disaster.
Its also time to update the statistics on arctic ice loss. Last fall we were being told that arctic ice was itself on the endangered list, and that the ice had shrunk from 13 million square kilometers to just 3 million. All true, and very scary to the uninformed, but oddly enough by the end of winter this year, the ice cover had actually rebounded and then some to past 13 million.
What does it mean? Its called a seasonal cycle, and it happens every year. Just look at the ice chart and you will see it for yourself. And the ice in Antarctica has actually expanded in recent years to the point where it has been setting records for the most ice ever seen. (This little detail somehow went unreported in most stories last month about part of the Wilkins Ice Shelf breaking off from the Antarctic mainland, as did the fact that the Wilkins Shelf sticks out into the warmer South Atlantic and is above a region noted for volcanic activity. Read more by doing a search for Wilkins at www.icecap.us)
Bottom line is we dont know as much as some people claim about the weather.
To prove the point, consider that Khabibullo Abdusamatov, the supervisor of the Russian section of the International Space Station and a researcher at the laboratory of solar physics at Pulkovo Observatory in St. Petersburg, is predicting that mankinds next serious threat will not be global warming but a little ice age similar to the Maunder Minimum (1645-1715) when sunspots were exceedingly rare and the weather was exceedingly cold.
Abdusamatov claims that the solar radiation hitting the earth has been constantly decreasing since the 1990s and will reach its minimum approximately in 2041. Hmmm. Who knows? Im certainly not predicting the day after tomorrow will be unseasonably cold, but you just might want to put a stop loss order on those carbon credits you bought last year. Turns out that global warming is not such a hot pick after all.
Frank Miele is managing editor of the Daily Inter Lake and writes a weekly column. E-mail responses may be sent to edit@dailyinterlake.com
mtboat
Thanks Mr.Miele. Good job.
Otis
Ass H. L. Mencken wryly observed: The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed [and hence clamorous to be led to safety] by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. The current hoax of "Man Made global Warming" is simply the latest example.
Kalispell Native
Wow. Even though our annual precipitation is at historic low, a little extra snow in the mountains overturns all the climate-change concerns. That's great logic. You can't talk about the ocean to a frog in a well, I guess.
mtboat
A little snow does not "overturn" all the climate change(notice you didn't call it global warming) concerns. They fail on their own.
bimmermt
Narrogance your arrogance is a prime example of adult ignorance resulting from total bypass of the frontal lobe. This latest installment of the cerebral cortex is an evolutionary necessity. Early man did not have 50 caliber weapons, so thinking was a survival tactic. The amygdula, or emotional center, tends to rule the thought patterns of many who have little experience "thinking." So Narragance, Gus, Otis or Elmer, whatever yur names may be, one swallow does not make Spring. Snow on Big Mountain does not make glaciers. Expanding ice sheets do not make Iceland. Tune out, turn on, and tune in Elmer, Gus, and Otis. Times? They be a changen. (fur some anyway)
bimmermt
Yes sir, you can't talk about the ocean to a frog in a well. Very nice, expresses my personal feelings about Arrogance and his comrades.
Woody
In this country alone we burn hundreds of millions of gasoline a day, millions of tons of coal, and inordinate amounts of natural gas and you BELIEVE that what is happening to the atmosphere is "part of a natural cycle"? Common sense just ain't so common any more!
faithful reader
Were you trying to say "amygdala," bimmermt?
mtboat
It is clear to me that after many suggestions of where to look at several alternative sources for information, That no one can be bothered to check the facts, or at least try to figure out what I 'm saying. It would be nice to have a debate with facts refuting facts, but no, try and minimize and dismiss all points if they don't agree with yours. I spend many hours reading the other guys side, so that I can be informed enough about his position, to have an intelligent conversation. Once more I will give it to you straight. 1.The great global warming swindle. 2.Aaron Russo's, America-Freedom to Fascism. 3. End game by Alex Jones. If some of you investigate just one of these video's, we might have something to talk about.
mtboat
The amygdula, or emotional center, tends to rule the thought patterns of many who have little experience "thinking." Some of the posts here, are a good example. The usual party line,and mainstream media,have discouraged "thinking" by suppressing, discrediting, minimizing and slandering any one who dares speak of alternatives to their "truth". In my opinion to at least investigate the alternatives IS thinking.
Kalispell Native
We are spending $400 million a day in Iraq, losing the lives of 3 Americans over there every day, and burning god knows how much fuel, simply because we are addicted to oil. What if all the scientists were wrong, and what if Frank and Rush were right? Wouldn't it still be a good idea for us to become less reliant on oil as an energy source?
mtboat
Thank you. Absolutely right. My objection is not to the idea of getting off oil(especially foreign). I object to a new tax based on bad "science", that will harm many people of the world. And I object to being lied to. The elite rulers do not want us off oil. The same bunch that supports Obama and Clinton. I stand by my earlier post. Google video-The Great Global Warming Swindle. Then we'll have something to really discuss.