Glenn Reynolds linked to a Guardian article which has a disturbing quote:
James Hansen, one of the world’s leading climate scientists, will today call for the chief executives of large fossil fuel companies to be put on trial for high crimes against humanity and nature, accusing them of actively spreading doubt about global warming in the same way that tobacco companies blurred the links between smoking and cancer.
I think that there are three factors which could explain the rise in temperature measured from 1970 to 2000 and only one of those is human causation due to greenhouse gas emissions. The other two factors are changes in the output of the sun and the heat island effect. There have been climate changes which were clearly not caused by man. There was a warming period from 900 AD to 1300 AD and a little ice age in the 18th Century. If you measure the temperature in a grassy field and in an adjacent parking lot, one would reasonably expect the grassy field to give a lower temperature reading than the one from the parking lot. That we tend to measure temperatures in developed areas that are growing should naturally cause the temperature reading to slowly rise.
I am not stating that human caused global warming is not happening. I am speculating that it may be happening at a somewhat lower rate than the alarmists say is happening. The alarmists are proposing drastic changes to deal with the problem. If the problem is not as severe as they insist it is, then we have time to take a much less drastic solution to the problem.
I believe we should care about the environment, and that a healthy environment is an important thing. However I believe a healthy economy is also an important thing. Many of the policies demanded by the global warming alarmists have powerful negative economic consequences.
I’m glad nobody reads this blog, because if they did, people like Hansen would be accusing me of crimes against humanity for daring to question their credibility. The severity of global warming should be open to scientific debate. The religious fervor with which Hansen and others demonize their critics suggests to me that that the debate has gone from a scientific one to a religious one.