Let’s face it: us pesky humans are constantly changing the climate around us!
From as far back as we know, we have always tried to create pockets of micro-climates where we controlled the water flow and maintained temperatures as close to the 20-22 degrees Celsius optimum as possible! We call these ‘our homes’.
And, we have become very good at creating and maintaining these human-changed pockets of climate!
As I point out to my husband just about every summer, when he suggests that camping might be a fun family activity: it took our ancestors thousands of years to develop running water at just the optimal temperature to fill a ‘soaker-tub’, it took centuries of engineering to be able to control the heating and cooling of our house with the touch of a button, it took decades of scientific research to put little box into our basement so I can connect to the whole world! To voluntarily sleep on the hard ground, separated from the elements by nothing but a thin piece of cloth held up by glorified sticks – that would be disrespectfully turning our backs on our ancestors!
The tent, of course, is also an artificial microclimate: but nowhere as nice as our home. But, ‘indoors’ is not the only climate we are building…
It is a well known phenomenon that the temperature inside a forest is several degrees cooler than in the meadow just beside it: this is a function of the type of vegetation that grows there. Plants use the energy from the air which surrounds them to eat up carbon dioxide and poop out oxygen – this energy ‘in the air’ is indeed what we measure as ‘temperature’.
In a meadow, the plants are usually (plus or minus) ‘knee deep’. In a forest, there are short plants, too – plus they are surrounded by plants which are much taller. And, all the green bits of these plants are eating up the carbon dioxide and cooling the air around them in the process. Since the plants here are ‘stacked up above each other’, and each bit is sucking in energy out of the air, it is not surprising that the forest is cooler than the adjoining meadow because some of the heat from the air is absorbed by the plants (and turned into food) at every layer of the forest.
When we surround our homes with tiny little short lawns, where each blade of grass is chopped into stunted obedience (admission – I think that ‘manicured lawns’ are hideous and unsightly, as well as philosophically offensive), we have replaced the trees and bushes which used to grow there with plants which are nowhere near as good at cooling the air as a forest (or even scrub, or the plants in a marsh) would be. We may not think of it that way, but when we mow our lawns and pull out the thistles, we are altering our climate by propagating plants which are relatively inefficient in cooling the air and reducing the carbon dioxide levels.
The same holds true when we cut down forests and plant crops (OK – I am not referring to Christmas tree farms….I mean grains, and so on). And I am not even talking about the large areas we pave, because we find pavement to be convenient – forests which absorb heat are now replaced by cement or asphalt which absorb the heat and radiate it right back out.
Predictably enough, the temperatures we measure in cities are higher than in the ones we measure in the countryside just outside them. This effect is called ‘urban heat islands’ and is well known to climatologists. (OK- my description is a simplification… these references do a better job.)
Here is a nifty video I came across, which really clearly illustrates this:
This video used the surface temperature data collected by NASA’s GISS – the same data was also available to the IPCC scientists…. If you would indulge me, I would like to point something out: I have not verified that what this kid and his dad have done is accurate. BUT – I could, if I wanted to! Because unlike the IPCC cabal, which swore they would rather delete their ‘source data’ than reveal it – and this data has, mysteriously, been accidentally deleted due to lack of storage memory (!), this kid and his dad have (in preparing a YouTube video) followed the scientific method with much greater integrity than our esteemed IPCC experts. Notice what theboy and his dad did:
- Stated what they wanted to find out, and why (their hypothesis)
- Stated where they took their data from (the NASA GISS site – they showed both the web address and screenshots), so people would be able to get the same data from there and check that they were not making it up, or that they did not make any mistakes.
- Stated how they selected the sites they used: a pair of readings, one inside a city, one in the countryside nearby
- Stated how they defined ‘city’ (minimum population size) and ‘countryside’ (maximum population size)
- Stated how they ‘controlled’ for geographic variations: the maximum distance separating the ‘city’ and ‘country’ pair, to make sure that they really were located in the same geographic area
- Showed the points they actually used – each and every one of them, along with the selection criteria, was scrolled down the screen, making it possible for everyone to check their work and reproduce it
- Showed their methodology: the dad explained, in detail – and repeating himself to make sure he was clear – exactly what they did with the data once they decided which points to use….again, everyone can follow his steps EXACTLY in order to verify his claims
- Showed intermediate results: the ‘in-between’ stages of the data, the various graphs, are shown and clearly explained what it is they are showing and how they were generated
- Showed final results and explained how they related to (confirmed, in this case) tw thheir hypothesis – in other words, they said this is why/how our results confirm what we said at the beginning
EVERYONE CAN RE-DO THIS TO CHECK IT FOR THEMSELVES!!!
And THAT is what ALL scientists are supposed to do – not just for little videos, but especially for work based on which trillions of dollars are being spent! But, I digress from my original point…
Which was that yes, we humans ARE changing the climate around us. If nothing else, this little amateur video has demonstrated this: but this ‘ACC’ is not caused by carbon dioxide emissions, it is caused by deforestation and urbanization….
Carbon caps will have no effect on it whatsoever!
In science, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
The CRU climatologists have not only failed to provide any proof of their claims (aside from their say-so), they have actively destroyed data so that nobody else can provide a proof, either. Without a proof, why should we believe them – especially when an alternative explanations for the same data, presented transparently and verifiably, is so easily available?