The sun causes global warming?
Continuing with my pet subject of late, here's an aricle that suggests what I've long suspected, that scientists don't really know what causes global warming. I'm not claiming to know either, but it's always been informative to question the oil industry's or environmentalists' science. With so much at stake, vested interests will massage numbers and sometimes outright lie.
I'm not trying to pick on environmentalists. The chemical/oil companies and such are far worse because they know they're lying. But let's be honest, know-it-all college hippie environmentalists are just spitting back what their professor said (he wrote a book!).
I definitely get the feeling that for most environmentalism is an accesory, a badge you wear to show how cool you are. When people ask you at parties what you do and you say you're an environmentlist, you're 17% cooler than you were before they knew. It's just the way it is (engineering causes the reverse effect, we call it "insurance salesman anti-mojo").
I'm prefacing with all this enviro-butt kissing because I'm about to offend them. Let me just say that I like environmentalists and I would consider myself one of them if they would have me (I'm concerned about the environment and I separate for recycling, does that count?).
But. But "environmentalism" is closer to a religion than a science. Bear with me before you scoff. All religions have the same basic structure: what we're saying is the real truth and you have to believe what we say and follow our rules otherwise the world is going to end. Sound familiar?
They even look scornfully at non-believers, try to win converts, and marry within the tribe. Once I noticed that environmentalism is more easily understood as a religion rather than a science, it became much simpler to deal with environmentalists. Don't question their beliefs, you may as well be arguing creationism with a Mormon. "Republican" is an epithet and wearing clothes made out of hemp proves that you care about the Earth. Just accept them as they are. If you respect their beliefs and allow them their quirks, they will prove to be great friends and concerned dedicated citizens. Alot like Christians.
So anyway, back to the subject of global warming. I know this is a little bit out there, but it seems to me that from a common sense standpoint, if we want to know why the temperature on the Earth is rising, we should look at the sun. Solar activity has increased alot in the last ten years and lo and behold, the temperature of the Earth has increased as well. It's amazing really, that when the sun radiates more energy into the universe, the things closest to it get hotter.
You all know the sun, it's that enormous flaming wad of fusion at the center of our solar system, aka the source of all our heat. And it isn't just Earth. Climates are changing all across the solar system. The only thing in common here is the sun. There aren't any smoke stacks or SUVs or godforbid, stripmalls on Mars.
I know I'm of the inexplicably despised "yuppie" class so everything I say is tarnished with the stain of ... having a job ... and living in the city ... (I'm so ashamed) but it just seems obvious that the sun is going to have a much larger effect on our climate than fossil fuels. Not that I'm suggesting we don't get off of using them, but I think our biggest concern should be that gigantic fusion orb that's been hurling heat and radiation at us for eons. I think we should concentrate on studying the sun and ways to calm it down.
And that's how we know the Earth to be ba-nah-nah shaped.

10 Comments:
I am going to have to object to your gross generaliztion of all environmentalists as hemp-wearing, dreadlock-having, hippie sheep. Congressman Greg Walden, R-OR, one of the most conservative members of Congress, is an environmentalist. He is currently drafting bipartisan legislation with Earl Blumenauer, D-OR, one of the most liberal members, to improve federal wilderness protection policies. Greg doesn't wear hemp and I certainly don't think "Republican" is an epithet to him.
There is a lot more to environmentalism than global warming. Rural rednecks actually have more at stake with regard to habitat protection and surface water quality standards than do elitist urbanites. I think if you could remove the underlying political nature of the debate, you would find that conservative, rural people are also "environmentalists."
You describe environmentalism as a religion, and in truth there is a spiritual aspect to it. You also say "When people ask you at parties what you do and you say you're an environmentlist..." but if it more of a religion, a philosophy, who would say that? Have you ever heard someone say "I'm an environmentalist?" I somehow doubt that. If you ever do, I hope you press them to be more specific and find out what the hell that even means. If someone said "I'm a Christian, I do the Lord's work" when they actually work at a bank, they would be a nutcase. Same thing applies here.
Starry-eyed college kids who think they know everything are not unique to "environmentalism." You probably never had to go to your school's IT help desk, but let me tell you, for some people, engineering/computer science is just as much a religion as Christianity or environmentalism.
This from the guy who affectionately posts a little hate essay, DEAR YUPPIE SCUMBAGS. Hey JB, as soon as you finish school and get a job, you'll be a yuppy too. You're not suicidal are you? Or you could avoid the label and live in the suburbs. Maybe get a minivan and an above ground pool? I've got a beer belly with your name on it (seriously, you can have it).
You can say what you will, but environmentalism is still easier to understand as a religion than a science. I don't understand the science behind it, so I'm always skeptical of anyone's claims, and everyone is always swearing this or that is true.
I fully agree with you about the computer-geek-as-a-religion-too thing. Fucking tell me about it. I knew a kid who burned a stack of s/w from the floor to the ceiling that he knew he was never going to use, just to have it. He ended up getting arrested for it.
Yeah, I know all about that type. From your perspective I can see the religion analogy working for you too. Religion and geek are close apparently (please note the difference between a geek and a nerd).
And hey, if environmentalist can be loosely defined, I'd like to consider myself one. I need to learn more about the science, but it's so hard to find any nuetral source.
Things like polar ice and observed solar energy are easily measured quantities however. And let's just The Logan Scribe so far isn't happy about it.
As someone who spends a LOT of time around people that you would probably label as "environmentalists," I too have to strongly object your depiction of them. The people I know are very intelligent, very rational, and very educated. They have reasoned arguments that are well grounded in established science. There is neutral science out there - the National Academy of Sciences is neutral. Any journal that is peer reviewed will be balanced.
I think you should read my friend Chris's book.
Well, I don't know any world famous bloggers or incarcerated Greenpeace activists, but still I find it hard to respond to your claim that you "don't understand the science behind" environmentalism. That is such a broad based claim....what part don't you understand? That dumping endocrine disruptors into waterways results in large fish kills is beyond dispute. Ditto oil spills. Same thing goes for the toxic properties of diesel exhaust and emissions from coal power plants. Leaking underground storage tanks that contaminate groundwater which is used for human drinking water supplies are generally regarded as a bad thing. The science behind "environmentalism" is just that: science, and thus has a broad range of applications.
As an engineer you should appreciate that. What if I said that I don't understand the science behind engineering? Would that make any sense? Or would you wonder if I meant physics (Newtonian, nuclear, quantum...aerodynamics, mechanical, electromagnetism?) Or the chemistry of it (organic, inorganic, aquatic)? Or something else entirely that could be classified as science? You see, I would never make such a claim, because I do undertsand the science behind much of engineering, I may have just never thought about its direct applicability to various engineering protocols. But that's not an engineer's fault.
I meant to add...if you want to say that you don't believe humans are causing global warming, just say it.
And I didn't post a "little hate essay"...I LINKED to a letter to the editor of a newspaper that someone else wrote.
Yikes guys, don't take me so seriously. How can anyone take that as serious commentary? Was it not obviously offhand comments? Dial the hostility down a few notches.
I'm generalizing for humor effects mostly. I don't stand by my comments, geez. Don't take it personally or I'm going to start calling people fat. This is why I find it better off to just avoid discussing this sometimes. Look at how much hullabaloo has resulted from a few what-I-was-hoping-were humorous comments.
So anyway, yeah, I'll read your buddy's book RCR.
JB, I don't think it's possible to support pollution. I think everyone is opposed to it, except for industry. My main concern is indeed global warming.
I don't think humans are not creating it. My guess is it's mostly caused by solar activity and it's exacerbated by greenhouse gases. And there's the crackpot theory that there's an underground electromagnetic war going on. Either way we know the icecaps are melting and we're about out of time to save us from a severe climate shift.
Maybe it's time to buy some mountain property?
And I didn't imply authorship when I said "posted". If I meant that I would have said "wrote". But whatever. In a post intended to focus attention on solar activity we're wasting time talking about semantics and getting offended when it's pointless to.
It's my fault for poking fun and causing this anyway. I knew what would happen. Religious people never have a sense of humor about their beliefs.
Yuk, yuk!
If the North Polar ice cap melts, it won't directly affect sea levels. Don't you remember Mr. Wizard?
Oh, and I'm reading this book right now called "Environmentalism Unbounded" by Robert Gottleib. It's basically the history and future of environmentalism. You should read it...it's really, really boring.
What was the Mr. Wizard thing?
Explain again how sheeps' bladders may be employed to prevent earthquakes.
Essential link:
http://www.rit.edu/~smo4215/monty.htm
Post a Comment
<< Home