Questions for politicized climate scientists
Letter to Herald, 16/9/2019
If a light is held close to an object, the object gets hot. If a larger bulb is used, the object gets hotter. If the surface is painted white, the temperature is moderated, if black, it gets hotter.
Three factors: (1) Distance between source and object, for earth Milankovitch cycles. (2) Intensity of source, for earth solar minimums. (3) Conditions on the surface of the object, for earth greenhouse gases, and glaciation.
For much discussion, both (1) and (2) often ignored, are we to assume that distance and intensity have no effect? If so, how do scientists account for climate variation say, 100,000,000 years ago?
If (1) and (2) are rated significant, will they compound the impact of greenhouse gases or moderate it? And how does the significance of distance from sun and intensity of sun impact the effect of greenhouse gases? It must be reduced.
There is no question the climate is changing. That is no issue …
The issue is demanding economic action adversely impacting our economy when likely nothing we do will have an effect.
We don’t really know what exactly to plan for, hot or cold, with one plausible scientific opinion (involving solar minimums) predicting it is going to get very cold…