Just because I’m skeptical about the claims the Global Warming crowd make does not mean I throw that skepticism out the window when the other side presents their case. In this post I referred to a program broadcast in the UK (okay okay, “programme”) entitled “The Great Global Warming Swindle” and mentioned that I could not recommend it. Well here’s why:
On the surface it paints a damning portrait of the Global Warming movement, and in spite of what I’m going to say here it may very well turn out that when all the fog clears (caused by the water vapor which we all know is a greenhouse gas more abundant than CO2) many of the assertions they make, perhaps even the crux of them, will be proven to have been valid in the end.
- The apparent falsification that we should expect warming for the period 1940-1980 where there is none can be explained by the impact of sulfate emissions.
- The apparent falsification that we should expect the troposphere to warm faster than the surface when data shows otherwise can be dismissed when we use the most current satellite data.
- The part about CO2 levels lagging temperature by 800 years (this was the strongest argument the show made imo), when you consider that 800 years constitutes a fraction of a warming period, does not rule out the possibility that CO2 and temperature might be influencing each other.
If anyone thinks I’m missing something important here please feel free to say it. I will listen. Otherwise I’m inclined to view the Channel 4 piece as propaganda of more or less the same caliber as what we’re accustomed to getting from a certain former vice-president.
Update: Voice of Reason examines propaganda from the pro-side here.