Global warming is a hot topic

Monday, February 19, 2007 9:38 AM EST

It was my pleasure to present “Climate Change: The New Urgency of Emission Reduction, and How to Make a Difference” at the Cornell Cooperative Extension in Auburn. In response to the article on the presentation published Feb. 7 in The Citizen, a number of readers wrote comments on the newspaper's Web site. Here I'll respond to some key points made by the readers.
“DD” wrote “Global warming is bunk. The earth goes through changes over decades.” Along a similar vein, Chris Van Note wrote “in the 1970s it was all about global cooling and a new ice age coming and now this.” Unfortunately, since the late 1970s the trend in average global surface temperature has been warming, not cooling. Of special concern is that the rise in temperature is accelerating, as can be seen from the data plotted in the graph on my non-profit Web site www.climatehealth.net.

“Mother Nature” wrote that “Many scientists have concluded that carbon dioxide doesn't even affect climate.” However, it's universally accepted by scientists who study the climate that greenhouse gasses such as carbon dioxide are responsible for blanketing the Earth from the cold of space. During the talk, I showed slides that detailed the greenhouse effect and how our activities result in emissions that do very substantially increase the levels of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere, increasing their retention of heat, warming the Earth.

“rd” asked “Will Dr. Johnson please explain why global warming happened in the past before there was so called Greenhouse effects?” Solar and orbital factors have contributed to the rise in temperature that brought the Earth out of the Ice Age to the climate that has allowed civilization to flourish. Those changes took place over many millennia. The present warming is accelerating so rapidly over decades, not millennia, that no known natural factors could be forcing it strongly enough. Therefore human activities must be contributing to it, especially since human-induced emissions have increased the levels of greenhouse gasses with similar rapidity.

Leon Kapowski wrote “global warming alarmists are in it for one thing, and one thing only ... the almighty dollar.” I'm retired from working on research and development in industry. I don't charge a speaker's fee for this voluntary community service. I operate the Web site at a loss (no pop-up ads on the site). I don't desire any income from this work.

My reward is the hope that the efforts of myself and those who are willing to listen, investigate the information on how to make a difference and act to support the transition to renewable energy sources and increase efficiency, result in a marginally more livable planet for the children than if we had ignored the several accelerating repercussions detailed in the slides. And a further reward is the hope that everyone's efforts result in a stronger, more energy independent U.S. Occasionally throughout history, a generation is faced with a crisis. It's up to us to expend personal effort and resources to make the transition and increase efficiency. For the children.

Sylvester Johnson

Johnson, Ph.D. Applied Physics, can be contacted through his Web site.

www.climatehealth.net

The Citizens' Say

Post your comment - click here

There are 10 comment(s)

Chris Van Note wrote on Feb 19, 2007 11:16 PM:

" Please do not be jealous because I am so smarter than all of you. I just attribute it to disregarding anything that I can dismiss as "liberal rhetoric". Try it, you'll learn alot. "

Chris Van Note wrote on Feb 19, 2007 9:23 PM:

" I'm not saying that they are lying per se, but stretching things. The squeaky wheel gets the grease type of thing. We need to protect the environment but I don't believe it is as dire as Al Gore hyperventilates it is. I think you'll find this interesting, its from PBS (hardly a bastion of conservitism): http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/warming/debate/singer.html "The Medieval and Roman warmings, with their intervening cold periods, present a huge problem for the advocates of man-made global warming. If the Medieval and Roman occurred warmer than today - without greenhouse gases, what would be so unusual about modern times being warm as well?" "The temperatures at the North and South Poles are lower now than they were in 1930. The Antarctic Peninsula, the finger of land pointing north towards Argentina (and the equator) has been getting warmer...The other 97 percent of Antarctic has been cooling since the mid-1960s." S. Fred Singer, Distinguished Research Professor, George Mason University and Dennis Avery, Senior Fellow, Hudson Institute and co-authors Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1500 Years. Also another myth: CO2 is the most common greenhouse gas. FACT: Greenhouse gases form about 3 % of the atmosphere by volume. They consist of varying amounts, (about 97%) of water vapour and clouds, with the remainder being gases like CO2, CH4, Ozone and N2O, of which carbon dioxide is the largest amount. Hence, CO2 constitutes about 0.037% of the atmosphere. While the minor gases are more effective as "greenhouse agents" than water vapour and clouds, the latter are overwhelming the effect by their sheer volume and – in the end – are thought to be responsible for 60% of the "Greenhouse effect". Those attributing climate change to CO2 rarely mention this important fact. "

karl logan wrote on Feb 19, 2007 8:52 PM:

" Impressive articulation of cold hard facts Chris; you almost had me there, except for the fact that all the snowcaps and glaciers are still melting at unprecented rates, and the wide majority of the scientific community asserts that global warming is a FACT. It's funny how you don't seem to have any use for the considered opinions of the scientific community at large--look, I'm a card-carrying member of Cynics International, but if you expect me to think that all these people are just in it for grant money, you're stretching it a bit far even for me. Let's say you're right about the readings of those vaunted measuring devices--don't forget that NASA scientists, by THEIR OWN ADMISSIONS--were forced to falsify and alter EXACTLY such type of reports gathered from satelite and other sophisticated monitoring systems. Who's to say that they can even be called reliable? I admit that I'm speaking hypothetically to some degree, but the "evidence" of the (very possibly faulty) stats which you cite just don't square with the visual and anecdotal evidence. Again, Chris--have you seen Gore's movie? Have you seen the evidence of the CO2 in the atmosphere? Even if it is partly naturally-occuring,(cow flatulence, etc.) don't we as humans have some responsibility to curb our horrendous output? Have you seen the literally raging rivers of meltwater undertmining the Greenland shelf? Hysterical?! I'd rather be a bit on the "emotional"/responsible side than to be caught flatfooted and unaware when the tipping point bites the Human Race in the ash! I do give you props for your commendable effort in doing your research; I guess we'll have to agree to disagree though, and I admit that I just don't trust the accuracy or relevance of the stats, with the revelations that have come out about how the scientific community has been pressured and forced to falsify. And you would be certainly disingenuous to not admit that the Business Fascists currently pulling the strings of this administration would go to any lenghts to skew the profit margins in their favor--and skewing the stats for global warming would naturally be the first place to start. "

Chris Van Note wrote on Feb 19, 2007 7:29 PM:

" Hey Karl, when I have a debate with regard to science, actual facts and figures are what matters. Math doesn't cry or laugh, etc...it is what it is. There is no emotion in math or science, either it adds up or it doesn't and in your case: it doesn't. E/I = Emotion over Intellect won't change the FACTS. Hysterical Myth: Global temperatures are rising at a rapid, unprecedented rate. Science Based FACT: Accurate satellite, balloon and mountain top observations made over the last three decades have not shown any significant change in the long term rate of increase in global temperatures. Average ground station readings do show a mild warming of 0.6 to 0.8C over the last 100 years, which is well within the natural variations recorded in the last millennium. The ground station network suffers from an uneven distribution across the globe; the stations are preferentially located in growing urban and industrial areas ("heat islands"), which show substantially higher readings than adjacent rural areas ("land use effects"). I guess if you run around screaming and yelling about how we'll be bbq'd if we don't change our ways right this very minute, it makes it much easier to get a grant. Here is something you should take to heart: "The sleep of reason brings forth monsters" Francisco de Goya. "

karl logan wrote on Feb 19, 2007 5:39 PM:

" OK, y'all, pay attention here, cuz I'm gonna throw some "emotional" Liberal truth at ya....Yes, its true that the earth goes through periods of cooling and heating; not even us "emotional Liberals" debate or would deny that--but here's the difference. The RATE of heating/cooling that is occuring today is commensurate to the rates between, say, the way that your house heats up from May through August, as opposed to how it does the same when your kitchen is on fire. Chris, the facts you cite are valid only in reference to centuries and eons; we're talking about mere decades here with what's happening today! "Couldn't have said it better"--Your attitude is arrogantly SHAMEFUL! You're "all for helping the earth but not at a huge inconvenience to us"--what a self-centered ignorant fool you sound like! You sound like that type of person that would let a small child drown 'cause you did'nt want to ruin your favorite pair of shoes...when are you people gonna realize that we're all in this together?!?! I guess it doesn't matter to you if a few cool million people in Holland or India drown or become refugees, right? I mean, you don't know their names, will never se their faces right?! What's the harm! And Chris, god forbid that the day ever should come when I so casually divorce my "emotion" (read: "compassion, caring, concern, etc.") from my arguments and/or to dispassionately offer opinions with as much empathy towards my fellow human beings that an insect might display--as you would seem to prefer. Again I ask you Chris--have you seen Gore's movie? Have you disproved his facts? Do your eyes lie to you about the rates of melting going on on mountaintops and glaciers worldwide? Or is you convenient access to "wikipedia" enough for you to sit contentedly behind a feeble argument and placate yourself that you're smarter cuz you can spin a few statistics around the periphery of this subject? "

couldnt have said it better wrote on Feb 19, 2007 5:02 PM:

" boy I couldnt have said it better chris. The world is in a constant swing of heating and cooling. The earth does this on it's own. Sure we may have a bit of an impact here and there with the gases we release into the ozone, but how arogant are we to think that we actually hold a candle when compared to the earth. If the earth doesn't like what we are doing to it, it will stop us, and it hasn't so far. I also would like to see what Al gore and the rest of the environmentalists think would be a good solution? stop driving cars? stop cooking? stop wearing pants? We need to be realistic. Im all for helping the planet, but not at a huge inconveniance to us. The earth will take care of itself. "

DiCondito wrote on Feb 19, 2007 4:26 PM:

" Interesting that Karl mentions Greenland. And why is it called Greenland? Because long before the internal combustion engine existed the Vikings explored there and settled there for a time - and IT WAS GREEN, NOT WHITE. Who knew? "

Chris Van Note wrote on Feb 19, 2007 1:33 PM:

" Again Karl you espouse the typical liberal: Emotion over Intellect Read what I wrote. I didn't say that we aren't having an impact and shouldn't do what we can to reduce pollution. I said that I don't buy into the hysterics that Al Gore and his ilk are pushing. Not all of us are chicken little. I look at the history: the Earth has had periods of heating and cooling and this very well may be one of them. Look up the Holocene Maximum and read the article. Its got those silver bullets to liberals: Facts. "

karl logan wrote on Feb 19, 2007 1:13 PM:

" DD, Chris and Leon--I have just one question for you ostriches; have you guys-any one of you- ever seen "An Inconvenient Truth"? Wait-no, I already know the answer! Since you obviously would never give a penny to a (GASP!) "Liberal"(!) in order to enrich your perspectives or open your minds, how can you expect your ignorance to be anything but patronized or ridiculed? Really, you guys aren't honestly listening to O'reilly and that comedian Limbaaaaah and taking them seriously are you?! Do you realize that what you essentially are doing is being advocates for pollution and inefficiency and waste? Have you ever been to places like Athens or Milan where the pollution from their old cars and ubiquitous scooters is so thick that you can actually SEE it, TASTE it---and wind up literally choking on it? Man, I really wish I could understand your line of "reasoning"--and I use that word loosely! Is'nt it just reasonable to assume that once again, it doesn't matter what kind of evidence is presented; you guys just percieve this as a "Liberal" issue and, given your blinding scorn for anything which you imagine to carry that ridiculously-expansive definition, you'll deny, deny, deny until Greenland's ice cap falls right into the sea?! I mean, this is really like a political thing for you guys, right? It's really about just refusing to admit you're wrong, and that "Liberals" have beaten your side to an issue that is resonating not just here in America but worldwide?! "

Chris Van Note wrote on Feb 19, 2007 12:44 PM:

" I'm not saying that humans aren't having an impact, I just don't by into the Al Gore type hysteria. Didn't the last Ice Age end about 10,000 years ago? Doesn't that mean we had/have a period of global warming? Temperatures rose to the "Holocene Maximum" of about 5000 years ago when it was about l.5C higher than now, dropped in the time of Christ, and then rose to the "Medieval Climate Optimum" in the years 600 to 1100, when temperatures. were about 1C higher than now. Seems to me that there wasn't any industry as we know it now and there certainly wasn't and SUVs running around. I got the info from Wikipedia. "

REGISTRATION IS FREE.
Registered users sign in here:
*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
 
Unregistered users can register here:

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

*Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
*E-mail Address:
*Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

First Name:
Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
 
E-Citizen
E-Edition
Wheels Etc.
Find a vehicle
Hot Jobs
Find a Job
Homes Etc.
Find a Home
TV Week
Find a program
Search Classifieds
Find, Buy
Place a Classified Ad
Sell
Skaneateles Journal
The Journal
New! Best Bridal
Here comes the bride. . .
Liven Up the Holidays
Fa-la-la-la-la-la-la-laaaaaa
Logo HereNew! Off the Menu
Good Eatin'!
Newspaper Ads
See it again
CNY Boats Etc.
Achors aweigh!
Sections
Special Sections

Top Jobs

The Citizen Copyright ©2009
A division of Lee Publications, Inc.
25 Dill Street
Auburn, NY 13021

Contact Us

Add to My Yahoo!