Whether or not global warming is happening or if humans are the reason for the rising temperature has been an ongoing debate between scientists, activists and many other individuals. In the blog “No Science, Fake Science, and the Destruction of the Nation” the author Alan Caruba makes many claims and arguments. His main claim is that CO2 should not be controlled. He thinks that global warming is a scam and that government is lying to people.
One of the author’s claims is that there is no such thing as dirty energy and the reason that people are attacking coal, natural gas, oil and nuclear power companies is their economic success. To support this claim he uses the first law of thermodynamics which states that “energy can be neither created nor destroyed. It can only change form.” I would consider this to be true, but it is how we get this energy and its’ impacts when it is used that is dirty not the actual energy itself. He states something that most people would take as fact to try and enforce his argument and distract us from the reality that there really are many energy sources that are dirty. Coal extraction uses strip mining. Coal creates acid rain when it is burnt. It has major negative effects on the environment and people’s health. The extraction and refinement of natural gas and oil also causes a lot of pollution by toxins being released into the air and spills that will enter water sources. Nuclear could be seen as clean but if any of the by-products are disposed of improperly there can be catastrophic effects on humans and the environment.
Caruba states that wind and solar energy are undependable and inconsistent. Here he lists downsides of wind and solar energy, but does not state their benefits; he is only showing one side. Here is he not telling the whole truth to support his claim. The pros of wind and solar energy far outweigh the couple of negatives stated by the author. Solar and wind energy may not be as reliable as other energy sources, but if they are strategically placed they can be much more reliable. The major benefit of renewable sources is that they really are renewable and we are unlikely to just run out of sun or wind. If that ever happened, we would have much bigger problems than our energy source. Further, they do not produce dangerous by-product like the other energy sources.
Another claim of this author is that the Earth has always gone through periods of heating and cooling and this is just another one of those warmer periods. This can be a very strong claim, but there is more to this statement that should be considered. Here yet again the author only shows one side of the story. The problem with this claim is that CO2 levels are related to the temperature of the Earth and with higher CO2 levels comes higher temperatures. With the level of CO2 being higher now than ever before it seems very likely that the Earth’s temperature will also increase to a much higher level than it has ever been in the past. Hotter temperatures could result in disastrous effects to us as humans and the entire planet.
Caruba claims that only models have been used to show that the Earth’s temperature will increase with increasing CO2 levels which is apparently a ‘fake science.’ He states that it can be very easy for scientists and other individuals to skew the results to show a more exaggerated relation of CO2 and temperature. I can agree with him that is can be very easy to skew results. Here he is showing readers human error, which can de-validate someone else‘s argument. Even with human error this is not strong enough support. How are we to predict the future and determine if we are causing potential disasters unless we use scientific models? There is no way to know what is going to happen in the future unless we look as trends in the past and apply them to present data to peer into the future. Even if scientific results are slightly skewed it has been shown again, again that temperature will increase as CO2 increases. Caruba also states that models are ‘fake science’ this can be seen as true, because there is no experiment involved and it is mostly mathematics. Mathematics is necessary in science however, and the models are based off of scientific research. The definition of science is also controversial.
He also criticizes carbon credits. He believes that this would just give the government more power and only those that are investing in alternative energy will benefit. This seems to be a very true argument and I do not believe that carbon credits will solve any sort of problem. The difference between my opinion and Caruba’s is that he thinks there is no problem to fix and I do not think that that carbon credits are a real solution. Credits will just move around money between power companies, strengthening companies that are associated with the government. He is criticizing a controversial idea to support his own theory.
The author Alan Caruba has many arguments as to why he believes that global warming is a scam, but he fails to show the other side of most of his arguments. He uses human error to support his argument which is really not enough to back up his claims. He claims that we are using ‘fake science,’ which is hard to define and it seems to me that models are not complete fantasy. There is much evidence supporting that global warming is occurring. What humans need to consider is if we are willing to risk the future of our children and grandchildren by continuing our current actions. Would we rather do nothing and continue on our current route and take the risk. Or will we do something not knowing for certain if disastrous outcomes will occur, but at least try to prevent what seems to be a future with extreme temperature. Do we want future generations to hate us for making their lives more difficult and depriving them of all that we have now?
By Tara Wilson
References:
Caruba, Alan. "No Science, Fake Science, and the Destruction of the Nation." Warning Signs. 19 Sept. 2010. Web. 8 Nov. 2010. http://factsnotfantasy.blogspot.com/2010/09/no-science-fake-science-and-deliberate.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment