The New York Times ran an article last week that should have set pundit tongues wagging: “In Ancient Fossils, Seeds of a New Debate on Warming,” by William J. Broad. (Link by subscription only.) Robert Giegengack, a geologist at the University of Pennsylvania who studies past atmospheres, is quoted, saying, “It’s too simplistic to say low CO2 was the only cause of the glacial periods” that took millions of years. “The record,” he argues, “violates that one-to-one correspondence.”
Dr. Giegengack and others acknowledge that the earth is warming today, as it has done repeatedly, but they doubt that anyone knows exactly why. Other causes to consider are Sun cycles, cosmic rays that bombard the planet and changes in sea currents.
“More and more data,” reports Jan Veizer, an expert on Phanerozoic climates at the University of Ottawa, “point to the sun and stars as the dominant driver.”
Short of a new federal initiative to promote a “diplomatic resolution” of the problem with the Sun and stars, what are we to do? Maybe we should redeploy and gradually withdraw from the war on global warming?
Two other recent articles—from the London Sunday Telegraph (here and here)—pick up a similar theme. There are pages and pages of fascinating responses.
How much more of this can the Al Gore enthusiasts take?
One of the leftist follies of our age is that whatever scientific “consensus” at any given moment exists should be regarded as dispositive, and that it also should dictate all public policies that relate to the subject. Whether global warming represents a threat, and how much of one, are two questions that the media-accepted consensus previously has sought to assure us are settled, and so, too, the more relevant question of the extent to which human activity is responsible for whatever global warming is occurring. Until now, there has been an attempt to silence and denounce doubters.
We think it is possible and desirable for left and right, at least in America, to agree on sensible ways to conserve energy (such as the plug-in hybrid car) and to promote diversified and renewable energy sources. We need such cooperation in order to assist consumers in holding down costs and to lessen U.S. dependence on overseas energy sources. But there has to be some willingness to control the kind of hysteria that pushes for economy-destroying policies and promotes a totally unnecessary pessimism about the future.
(NOTE to Seattle area readers: At the Discovery Institute headquarters on December 5, Dr. Dennis Avery of Hudson Institute will speak on “Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years.” Call 206 292-0401, x 153, for a reservation.)
Note: This post was co-authored with Charles Ganske.