The BBC has a wonderfully balanced article on global warming that notes that the past 11 years have seen no increase in global temperature and that current climate models have failed to predict such a trend. What’s more, some scientists think we may actually be in a period of global cooling, although the science is far from settled – but that’s kind of the point, isn’t it?
In any case, the faulty models have a prediction we’ll hit soon enough to judge:
The Met Office [UK’s National Weather Service] says that warming is set to resume quickly and strongly. It predicts that from 2010 to 2015 at least half the years will be hotter than the current hottest year on record (1998).
So it should be simple, right? If we have at least three years between 2010 and 2015 that are hotter than 1998 than we can give more credence to climate models and anthropogenic global warming, so let’s err on the side of caution and wait till the data comes in before enacting sweeping climate legislation.
But instead we’re told we can’t wait and must pass climate change legislation now with little delay or debate. It’s my contention that before passing industry crippling mandates like cap and trade, we should at least come to a degree of scientific consensus that, despite what you may have heard, has not existed in the climate change debate. It seems we have to answer if warming is happening before saying whether humans and carbon are definitively the cause.
It’s one reason that the rush to get cap and trade through the Senate seems like a disingenuous ploy to control industry (no matter what party or what politician signs on to the effort). If the BBC is beginning to question the validity of global warming claims, the scare tactics might be on the wane, and skepticism and realism may finally have a chance to take charge in the climate debate.