Career Climatology scientists have been frustrated and fuming for years – not only that all the leaders and elite of the world accept without question that man-caused climate change is destroying our planet; not only that “only the politically correct” viewpoint re global warming gets research grants and peer-review publication; but also that such is the dictatum for candidacy for civilization’s most coveted and immensely valuable Nobel prizes (supposedly for Science). President Obama, Vice-President Gore and the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change) are Nobel Laureates, given the world’s top awards for their “green our Earth” activities. However – a petition signed by 31,072 Americans with academic degrees in science – denying that humanity-caused-global-warming is settled scientific fact – is ignored. Sponsored by eminent scientists, including Dr. Arthur Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine, the petition called upon the US to reject such a position as being “unscientific” – not that climate change may-or-may-not-be true, or that “if true” it may-or-may-not-be man-caused – but that the data base was scientifically insufficient to warrant such a conclusion. It had been disclosed that some critical climate temperature “data” had been faked – it is also conceded that human activities are puny in comparison to our huge and complex Earth, that the effect of the powerful Sun has been largely ignored, and that there are indications of cyclic climate changes spanning tens of thousands of years.
There is frustration over the “swept under the rug” disclosures of the infamous falsified “hockey-stick” graph, purporting to show gradually rising Earth temperatures. (A few United Nations IPCC “weather scientists” were forced to resign, but shouldn’t the Nobel Prize Committee rescind the IPCC’s award?) There is frustration over President Obama’s major UN speech – his “mea culpa” announcement of US contributory complicity in the “damaging” of planet Earth, and our commitment to tens of millions of dollars annually as obligatory reparations to 3rd world nations for our malfeasance – while his administration is seeking a punitive “Cap-and-Trade” bill through Congress, with emission-restriction penalties (handicapping US competitiveness in world trade – and during a recession). Generally un-reported while the above is happening, is that the Administration is meanwhile quietly curtailing and actually stopping funds for NASA weather data acquisition – original objective to find out if world temperatures are, in fact, really changing, and if so, the cause and significance.
Says the Director of the Department of Global Ecology at Carnegie Institution for Science, Stanford University, “I would say that our ability to observe the Earth from space is at a grave risk – dying from neglect. NASA Earth’s temperature readings – visual feeds from satellite monitoring – are being killed off, deforestation in the Amazon basin now show images streaked with white lines – devoid of data; the Landsat 7 satellite has become inoperative, emblematic of the nation’s battered satellite environmental monitoring program.” Adds a technician. “The bad news – it’s only going to get worse.”
Inez Fung, a noted climatologist at the University of California at Berkeley, expressed shock as she scanned a recent federal report warning of impending gaps in the country’s ability to monitor Earth from space. The federal document released in mid-2010, listed reductions in climate-monitoring-sensors from the next generation of Earth-observing satellites. Current satellites beam down many types of indispensable data about the planet, e.g. ocean currents, ozone levels and snow cover, however key instruments on the new satellites have been eliminated: gone is a sensor that would relay data about atmospheric and environmental conditions in the ocean and along coastal areas; the movement of pollutants and greenhouse gases would have been monitored as well. Also absent – potentially probing the very basis of the “global warming” challenge – a critical sensor that would have monitored temperature changes over time on our planet – no longer included.
In all, nine new climate instruments on the next generation of satellites were either cancelled or suffered scaled back monitoring capabilities. Combined with a five-year delay in launching these next-generation satellites, these cancelled or degraded instruments leave critical gaps in satellite monitored data – admitted in the report. A National Academy of Sciences analysis of the disarray in the satellite program stresses Earth’s growing population – thus the increasing importance of monitoring pollution, water quality, land-use and environmental conditions.
In the meantime, politicians and idealists fuel the dream of a green economy by use of “sound-good” arguments, filled with catch-phrases such as: “renewable energy”, “stop dependency upon foreign oil”, “reduce our carbon emission footprint”, etc. The concept of renewable energy, such as wind and sun have powerful appeals – since they seem to be freely available (like any good snake oil sales pitch). However, it is fossil fuels, such as oil, gas and coal, that have enabled the US and most of the world achieve unprecedented prosperity. The true “Inconvenient Truth” (the name of Al Gore’s prize-winning film) is that there is no realistic alternative to fossil fuels – at reasonable comparable costs and functionalities. A moratorium on deep-water drilling, or earmarked $ billions in “stimulus” funding for solar energy – while increasing costs – will not produce significant benefits (even with a national willingness to bankrupt future generations).
Rational analysis of shifting from conventional energy sources to renewables is like being doused with ice water, a shock into reality: types of energy, such as petroleum, natural gas, coal, nuclear power and renewables are not readily interchangeable. Despite the considerable hype and implications to the contrary, they cannot – except with considerable difficulty and efficiency losses – be exchanged, one for another: wind and solar energy cannot readily be used for transportation; nuclear power and hydro-electric power sources are essentially usable only to generate electricity. One needs to accept that fully 28% of total US energy goes for transportation; of that, 95% comes from petroleum, only 2% from natural gas, 3% from renewables. Industry consumes over a fifth of total US energy; of that 42% comes from petroleum, 40% from natural gas, 9% from coal and from renewables, most being hydroelectric sources. Homes, offices and factories take 11% of the energy we use; 16% of that from petroleum; 76% from natural gas; only 1% each from renewables and coal. Electric utilities provide about 40% of total energy: 51% coming from coal, and 21% from nuclear plants.
After decades of infrastructure optimization, costs and efficiencies – the least-cost type of energy source for the optimum application – what has evolved cannot be drastically changed by politicized hyperbole. A major point is that fully 84% of the total energy that powers the US today comes from petroleum, natural gas and coal. Even with heavy subsidization from the government, with billions in tax credits and stimulus incentives, the Obama Administration’s own Energy Information office projects that even 25 years from now, the US will still get three-fourths of its energy from fossil fuels. The “green dream team” has to wake up to reality.
Another reality however, with ideologues, is that they generally comprise the “elite” of our civilization, the main-stream media editors, publishers and writers, and political leaders – the “makers” of public opinion – and imbued with the “justness” of their cause, they ignore the practical realities. Caught up in the “green-is-essential-for-survival” ideology, they press on. Thus, here are the key words in a three-column writeup in the Daily News, Los Angeles, California – re the “Global Warming Solutions Act” passed in 2006, and an upcoming Proposition: “Vote No on Proposition 23″; “Proponents can’t make case for delaying emission rules”; “Passed in 2006, AB32 requires carbon emissions be reduced to 1990 levels by 2020″;.”cynical attempt to roll back environmental rules”; “impact on global warming”; “cleaner air and water”; “reduce carbon emissions”; “invest in cleaner fuel technology and global warming regulations”;.”switching to alternative fuels – trash trucks at $85,000 extra each”; “emerging global market for clean green technology”; “Venture Capitalists have already invested $9 Billion in California’s clean technology”.
“Greening Planet Earth.” Tremendous US expenditure of effort and wealth – loss of US jobs to countries who will not penalize their productive efficiencies with “Cap-and-Trade” emission restrictions – tens of $ millions paid annually to 3rd world nations as reparations for damaging our mutually-inhabited world – and all for a relatively insignificant improvement in fossil-fuel usage – from 84% to 75 % in 25 years! The essence of a dominating conventional wisdom of society today – climate change – can be captured by the apt phrase, “Don’t bother me with facts – my mind is made up!”. Thus, civilization progresses, struggling between ideology, practicality and reality!
Aaron Kolom qualifies as a “rocket scientist” with over 50 years aerospace engineering: Stress Analyst to Chief of Structural Sciences on numerous military aircraft, to Corp. Director Structures and Materials, Asst. Chief Engineer Space Shuttle Program through first three flights (awarded NASA Public Service Medal), Rockwell International Corp.; Program Manager Concorde SST, VP Engineering TRE Corp.; Aerospace Consultant.
Aaron L. Kolom – from Brainwashed* and Miracles**
* The Perceived Mind-Set of the Secular Elite re Darwin Evolutionism!
** To Believe in Them – Have Faith – In Science and Logic!
Visit website at http://www.brainwashedandmiracles.com/ to learn a bit about Science vs the Bible, from conflict to confirmation.
Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Aaron_Kolom
View the original article here
Recent Comments