The Climate Change Double Standard

Without a doubt, I believe that our climate is changing due to our increased use of fossil fuels, deforestation and other social/environmental injustices in the world.  But climate change proponents, please follow your own rules.  If anti-climate-change theologians tell you that they know that the climate is NOT warmer because of their local weather patterns, you will likely tell them it's not about local weather.  It's about global averages and major shifts in climate patterns, oceanic currents, polar ice caps, and cumulative impacts of multiple worldwide changes. But what about hot, dry local weather? That helps your case, doesn't it?

I was spurred on to write this blog entry based on another, more well-read blog than my own about global warming in Texas.  Treehugger.com states that

In the Dallas-Fort Worth area, Thursday [Aug 4, 2011] marked the 34th consecutive day that the mercury level went over the 100 mark. Dating back to 1895, July was the hottest month ever recorded in Texas, a state that knows a few things about serious heat. 

It's good we have some historical data for comparison, but the devil's advocate in me asks, don't records happen all the time, everywhere and at hot and cold extremes?  Is this kind of information helpful to anyone who is on the fence about climate change?  Isn't this feeding into the arguments against climate change, if you seemingly have a double standard of your definition of climate change?  On one hand you say "colder, snowier weather in your burg doesn't mean the ice age is coming," and on the other hand you say, "drought in Texas means climate catastrophe."  Please, offer a more tangible explanation of what's going on.

Another example:  The New York Times reported in April on the dryness of the soil in Midland, Texas, but did not offer broader information that indicates a larger trend, except to say that la Niña was involved.  And by broader information, I don't mean just a map of the United States that shows how dry it is this summer.

Not only is this a snapshot rather than an illustration of a trend, but the population density in the areas of high rainfall generally exceeds the drought-stricken areas.

Population data from the 2000 U.S. Census and 2007 population estimates.

The likelihood of convincing the scattered masses in the bible belt that praying for rain isn't the best option has proven to be low.  No, instead they pass laws like this one in the legislature:

H.R.910: To amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes.

It's really no wonder that people are confused when they are only given snapshots of a larger issue, and they can't see the forest for the trees.  And speaking of confused people who live around trees, you'll only need to watch a minute or two of this video to see how and why this Oregon man is genuinely baffled by reports that "global warming causes cooling."

I must admit I did not watch the entire video, above, but I did hear him say (I paraphrasae) that Greenland was once agricultural, and that the thick layer of ice on it now was not anthropogenic.   Ironically, glacial evidence suggests that the initial non-reversed changes in our atmosphere commenced when agriculture came on the scene, around 7000 to 6000 BC, far before the industrial revolution.  These findings by the Center for the Remote Sensing of Ice Sheets are not yet published as far as I can tell.

 If you really want to get an idea of what's going on with the world's climate, or if you're wanting to write an article about local weather and want to tie it into global trends, visit the NASA Surface Temperature Data website.  If you already spent too much time watching that video, above, please at least watch this one-minute animation of 10-Year Mean Anomalies from 1881-2007.  Or, if you have even less time, watch this 20-second version.  They will leave you seeing red.