Saturday, August 23, 2008

Global Warming Debate: Oops…WMO says First Half of 2008-COOLEST in 5 Years!

From yahoo-Reuters (highlight mine),

``The first half of 2008 was the coolest for at least five years, the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) said on Wednesday.

``The whole year will almost certainly be cooler than recent years, although temperatures remain above the historical average.

``Global temperatures vary annually according to natural cycles. For example, they are driven by shifting ocean currents, and dips do not undermine the case that man-made greenhouse gas emissions are causing long-term global warming, climate scientists say.

``Chillier weather this year is partly because of a global weather pattern called La Nina that follows a periodic warming effect called El Nino.

"We can expect with high probability this year will be cooler than the previous five years," said Omar Baddour, responsible for climate data and monitoring at the WMO.

"Definitely the La Nina should have had an effect, how much we cannot say."

Read the rest here.

My comment:

Yeah sure…if La Nina’s impact to global warming/cooling seems unclear even to the experts, how can we be confident that those advocating for a “man-caused” global warming climate can be said with certainty?

Yet, if mathematical models or the basis for the climate gloom and doom, have not predicted with efficiency the markets (1987 stock market crash-portfolio insurance programs and today’s quant "strategies") or even economic trends or aggregate human (social) behavior…why should I entrust the same to “professionals” whom are likewise susceptible to “cognitive biases” which may/can be influenced by ideology (socialism in green robes) or by power politics or by money (e.g. grants on research funds)?

As Dr. Patrick Moore, Co-founder of Greenpeace, Chairman and Chief Scientist of Greenspirit Strategies Ltd. in Vancouver, Canada recently said (highlight mine),

``Environmentalism has turned into anti-globalisation and anti-industry. Activists have abandoned science in favour of sensationalism. Their zero-tolerance, fear-mongering campaigns would ultimately prevent a cure for Vitamin A deficiency blindness, increase pesticide use, increase heart disease, deplete wild salmon stocks, raise the cost and reduce the safety of health care, raise construction costs, deprive developing nations of clean electricity, stop renewable wind energy, block a solution to global warming, and contribute to deforestation. How sick is that?”

Already too much of our mundane problems have been due to the unintended effects of "self-righteous- omnipotent-elixirs" based politics or by so-called populist political correctness.

Eventually delusions will be envisaged with harsh reality.

No comments: