Carbon dioxide — the current devil in the global warming debate — where does it really fit in?  The doomsayers call it a greenhouse gas and warn that the amounts of CO2 added by human activity will cause global chaos.  Let’s take a look at this gas.

First: CO2 occurs naturally in our atmosphere.  Here are the average percentages of the most abundant gases the make up the atmosphere:

• Nitrogen — 78.08%
• Oxygen — 20.95%
• Water vapor — 0-4%
• Argon — 0.93%
• Carbon dioxide — 0.036%
• Neon — 0.0018%
• Helium — 0.0005%

And so on.  A discussion of the atmosphere and a more complete list can be found here (the list is at the bottom of the page).  Does it seem rational that our activities could really add that much to the entire global atmosphere, and could it really make that much difference to a gas in such low overall concentration?  Sure I know that everything about this earth is very delicately balanced (too much for random chance, but I’ll save that for another discussion), but it’s still arrogant to think that we could have that much effect on such a large system that we know so little about.

Next: cause and effect.  Those on the global warming bandwagon would have us believe that increasing carbon dioxide increases the global temperature.  From Arctic ice cores, we can see a definite correlation, but which comes first?  You have to look closely, but this graph shows that the peaks of CO2 actually tend to follow the peaks in temperature, instead of the other way around. That makes sense — an increase in global average temperature leads to warmer oceans, which retain less CO2 and thus increase the atmospheric concentration.

But are more CO2 and warmer average temperatures necessarily such a bad thing?  Plants breathe CO2 and emit oxygen, so we humans, and all other oxygen-breathing animals, share a reciprocal relationship with plants.  More CO2 would create a better environment for lush plant growth and so more oxygen for us.

Warmer average temperatures would also be beneficial for humans.  The ice caps might undergo some melting, which could lead to higher sea levels and flood some low-lying areas, but almost certainly not to the degree global warming alarmists would have us believe.  This world is an incredible machine, balancing itself and transporting heat from one place to another in ways we still don’t fully understand.  It also has relief valves to avoid too much instability.  This world will survive; it’s set up that way.  An increase in the global average will cause a more survivable environment for humans, longer growing seasons, etc.

The world as we know it will probably change, assuming that global warming is even a reality, but the science there is far from conclusive.  But, then, it always has changed and we’ve adapted.  No need to try futilely to keep things the way they are…who’s to say whatever is to come won’t be better?

I just found an article on the Daily Telegraph website that sums up a lot of my feelings about global warming.  Titled, “2008 was the year man-made global warming was disproved,” makes several clear points without getting bogged down in a lot of esoteric science.

The author, Christopher Booker, lists three big ways the hysteria over global warming has changed this year:

1. global temperatures have been dropping instead of rising
2. there is no scientific consensus in favor of global warming
3. the global economy can’t support politicians’ schemes to combat global warming

I think it’s interesting to note that the global warming apologists are trying harder and harder to get people to buy into the idea, and that anyone who even questions the “consensus” is ridiculed or even blackballed.  If your argument is sound and backed by solid science, shouldn’t it be able to stand on its own without propping it up and defending it at every turn?

Another thing I noticed within the last year or two is that they rarely call it “global warming” anymore — it’s “climate change.”  Aside from avoiding the embarrassing headlines like “Global warming conference canceled due to blizzard,” it puts the global warming crowd in the enviable, however artificial, position of being able to always be right.  Record-breaking snowfall and cold snaps can be as easily attributed to climate change as summer heat waves, in the alternate world these guys live in.

The truth of the matter is, though, that 2008 has been one of the coldest years in recent history.  I’ve only lived in the Omaha area for 5 years now, but the past summer seemed particularly cool and short, while this winter has already had a brutally cold spell the like of which I don’t recall this early in the winter.  Last week we had a morning that the wind chill was -28F, and several mornings that started below 0F to reach highs only in the single digits.  Personally, I think we could use some global warming right about now.

I’ve had a personal blog going now for a little over a year, where I talk about family life and such, but what about my personal interests?  A friend of mine has a blog where he reviews different computer gear and talks about how to do different things on the computer.  That kind of thing I could share with anyone who stumbles across it, instead of keeping it to friends and family like my personal blog.

So here goes.  I’m starting a new endeavor here and we’ll see how long it lasts.  You probably noticed from the title that this will be (at least partly) about weather.  I am a meteorologist, so that’s a given.  I’ve also been following the whole global warming hysteria and this can be a venue for refuting some of that as a weather scientist, though, granted, not a climatologist.

I will admit that I don’t delve into the science of the atmosphere much, but to do my job I have been trained and understand how the atmosphere operates somewhat better than the average layperson.

That’s the basis of where I expect this will go, but we all know that time has a way of changing our best plans.  Thanks for visiting!