A climate change denier? Who, me?

By Dr. Harold A. Black

blackh@knoxfocus.com

haroldblackphd.com

Donald Trump is a climate change denier and calls it a hoax. I am not a climate denier because it is obvious that the climate always changes. I am just not in the camp that believes that climate change constitutes an existential threat. I am not in the camp that contends that whatever change is occurring is man-made and I am not convinced that even if it is man-made the change will destroy the environment.

I have constructed econometric models my entire professional life. Rarely do researchers use the same model, the same statistical technique, the same time frame and the same data set. That calls into question as to what is the appropriate model, the appropriate technique, the appropriate data and the appropriate time frame.

The same can be said about climate models. Questions arise as to their predictive power. Researchers have found different conclusions given what time period they study, how they model the climate and the technique used. Consider that in a survey of 36 climate change models it was found that the models overestimated the change in the earth’s climate by 43% according to “Global Warming: Observations vs. Climate Models“  by Roy Spencer. Another paper states, “And now we have way too much confidence in some very dubious climate models and inadequate data sets.”

I am certainly no expert on atmospheric physics, but I do know that climate models tend to be overly complicated with multiple equations on the physical and chemical processes attempting to mimic the climate system. Yet the models are still crude and rudimentary. One scientist has said, “We do not know much about modeling climate. It is as though we are modeling a human being. Models are in position at last to tell us the creature has two arms and two legs, but we are being asked to cure cancer. There is a good reason for a lack of consensus on the science. It is simply too early. The problem is difficult, and there are pitifully few ways to test climate models.”

I have always wondered about the relationship between carbon dioxide and global temperatures. It would seem simple enough to see if carbon changed by a certain amount, then how much did the temperature change. We model relationships like this all the time in economics. What about in climate models? The results are contradictory. There have been periods of rising carbon dioxide and rising temperatures and periods of rising carbon dioxide and falling global temperatures. If we happen to be in the former and not the latter then the climate alarmists will warn us of impending doom.

Does the earth repair itself and will it ward off any adverse effects of climate change? Who knows? Is the climate change itself a natural occurrence? Who knows? Is climate change manmade and can it be reversed through draconian government edicts? Actually, no. A study of over 1,500 climate policies in 41 countries showed that only 63 actually reduced greenhouse gas emissions. Anyone who claims to know the truth is doing so on faith rather than on fact. That is why the climate change zealots are said to have adopted climate change as a religion. It is a religion based on faith, a particular belief in what set of results and observations are factual, and a belief in a causal positive relationship between emissions and global temperatures.

Don’t misunderstand me. I am glad that we no longer see smoke belching from diesel engines. I am glad the air and water are cleaner. I am glad that we are no longer dumping our waste in rivers. But why ban coal-fired plants given today’s technology of “clean coal?” Why ban internal combustible engines? The environment is the cleanest it has been in industrial history and it is getting cleaner. I want that to continue. However, most measures undertaken today do not make a measurable difference in the earth’s temperature and should be rescinded. Solar and wind energy need to be reevaluated. Nuclear needs to be expanded. All this should be done in the name of a cleaner environment and not one due to trying to frighten little children that the earth will die if we don’t ban weed eaters and pizza ovens.