Forbes: Why Republicans should embrace the reality of climate change – ‘There’s no way of explaining what’s happened in the last 50 years through natural cycles’

By Matthew Herper, Forbes Staff
18 February 2013 (Forbes) – We have reached the point where every rational person who believes in making decisions based on science and available data should, if not fully believe that human beings are warming the planet by releasing greenhouse gases, at least recognize that this is what the data seem to suggest and that it is what the vast majority of scientists who study weather believe is the case. Recognizing this does not force anyone to oppose pipelines, support a carbon tax, or start composting and wearing hemp shoes. It just opens us up to start aiming our fiery furnace of a political system at actually solving our problems. Go ahead, argue that the economic cost of anti-greenhouse measures doesn’t justify the benefit, especially if the planet is getting too hot. Argue that we should look for technical solutions not only to reduce carbon dioxide and methane emissions but not to suck the stuff out of the atmosphere – although then you might find yourself standing with Bill Gates and calling for more investment in R&D. If you want to wade into the science, argue that the worst-case scenarios are overstatements. Below follow some of the main objections that have come up over the past year or so when I discussed this issue with conservative friends who do not believe in global warming – and the reasons why I think those objections have been covered. But warming stopped. No it didn’t. The global temperature is rising, but it also bounces around a lot. Between 1998 and 2005, average global temperature did not increase. But that’s because 1998 was really hot. An abnormally strong El Nino caused heat to move from the ocean into the atmosphere. Besides being cherry-picking, this also ignores warming in the ocean, scientists say. The Earth is getting warmer, but it’s too much of a leap to say that human beings are the reason. There are plenty of natural climate cycles and I believe in being skeptical. Fair enough. But this is science, and skepticism has to come within the framework of what we already understand. The scientific method does not simply mean coming up with an idea, or hypothesis, and testing it to see if it is true. Hypotheses are supposed to be based on our existing body of understanding – based on our current theory. These get tested before wilder and crazier ideas. We don’t just leap to testing whether aliens are using the planet as a dump for the heat from their warp drives. It’s certainly true that climate can change dramatically over time, and has. There have been ice ages and hot periods. But right now, there are not obvious candidates for other explanations of current warming. For instance, the sun seems to be cooling. “There’s no way of explaining what’s happened in the last 50 years through natural cycles,” says Donald Wuebbles, the Harry E. Preble Professor of Atmospheric Science at the University of Illinois.“We have no evidence of a natural cycle that can do anything like this. It also exactly fits with all our knowledge of what happens with carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases. We’ve known about greenhouse gases since 1824! We know the oceans are warming, the atmosphere’s warming, the land is warming. It’s all happening in tune with each other.” Wuebbles says “there’s no basis for trying to make up something because you’d like that to be true” and that “you can’t dream up natural cycles as if that will work.” [more]

Why Republicans Should Embrace The Reality Of Climate Change