Re: [Paddlewise] Water's been warm for this time of year!

Mike and I share concerns about cap and trade, inasmuch as it does not 
address the fundamental problem:  only by consuming less combustion-based 
energy can we actually reduce global production of CO2.  That is a root 
cause of global warming by any of the generally-accepted models of climate 
change.  Unlike Mike, I think the models are probably pretty good.

There is a fundamental reason to look askance at climate models:  Models of 
climate change can not be "tested" by manipulating environmental variables 
at will to see what the climate does.  Geologic processes likewise are 
modeled using theories which can only look at what nature hands us. That is 
why geology and atmospheric science necessarily require "looking back" to 
predict what might happen in the future, and can not be tested by the usual 
'hypothesis and experiment process.'  Can you imagine the uproar if 
scientists said to the global community:  "Oh, by the way, we are going to 
put a huge amount of acid into the oceans this month to see how changing 
the pH affects it"?  That means climate science will always be vulnerable 
to attacks from a position of ignorance such as the one Mike mounts.

Like Mike, I have the advantage of longevity in observation of local 
conditions; unlike Mike, I have lived in an area of North America where we 
have sensitive indicators of a rise in average temperature:  glaciers.  And 
they are uniformly melting and disappearing (with the occasional outlier). 
  My personal experience tells me GW is real.

Like Mike, I have access to media reports of the breakup of the Northern 
polar icepack, to the extent that there are very serious proposals to run 
commercial shipping across the top of North America.  Like Mike, who 
distrusts scientists in the know, I don't need a sophisticated analysis by 
any atmospheric or climate scientist to convince me that there is a 
systemic change in conditions responsible for that.  Even if there were a 
cabal of atmospheric scientists passing off bad data, my eyes and memory of 
a couple thousand years (minimum) of conditions in the Arctic tell me a 
huge change in global change is afoot.

Sometimes I wear a tin hat, also, but not when I can see clear evidence of 
large changes no one can ignore.

Finale:

This is my last and best shot on GW; longtime Paddlewisers may recall that 
ten years ago I was a vociferous GW __skeptic__; events on land and sea 
since that time have turned me to the opposite point of view.  And, though 
I am a scientist, I do not get any grant money from any agency.  In short, 
I am not a member of the alleged cabal.  Additionally, if it makes a 
difference to any one, the couple hundred colleagues I communicate with 
around the world in my field are pretty much about 95% convinced GW is 
real, and that the well-documented rise in greenhouse gases is very likely 
the cause.  Because a great number of them work for energy companies whose 
business will be impacted negatively by serious efforts to reduce global 
production of CO2 tells me they are a skeptical audience.  If they think GW 
is real, it probably is.

I'm done on this for Paddlewise.

-- 
Dave Kruger
Astoria, OR
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************