Debate: Is Global Warming an Emergency

Newsweek’s “The Debate” podcast invited James Taylor on their program to debate Heather Goldstone, the chief communications officer of the Woodell Climate Research Center.

Kudos to the podcast hosts at Newsweek for giving this topic a fair and even-handed airing.

You can listen below.

Here is the link to the Newsweek article by James Taylor

JAMES TAYLOR , PRESIDENT OF THE HEARTLAND INSTITUTE
ON 8/3/21 AT 8:05 AM EDT

For the vast majority of the time that human civilization has existed, temperatures have been significantly warmer than today. More than 30,000 scientists have signed on to a paper saying that we’re not facing a climate emergency.

Throughout the history of the earth, a more normal level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been about 1000 parts per million, not the 420 ppm we see today. The fact that carbon dioxide levels are so high, and yet compared to over the past few 100 or few 1,000 years, temperatures are lower than they’ve been throughout most of human civilization, tells you that carbon dioxide is not the control knob for global temperatures.

I believe humans may be playing some role in that warming. But saying you know for sure—I think that’s really taking a leap of logic. The American Meteorological Society is the only scientific body in the world whose full membership has been polled extensively on this issue. And when they are asked, “How concerned are you?” only 30 percent say they are very concerned.

I believe humans may be playing some role in that warming. But saying you know for sure—I think that’s really taking a leap of logic. The American Meteorological Society is the only scientific body in the world whose full membership has been polled extensively on this issue. And when they are asked, “How concerned are you?” only 30 percent say they are very concerned.

We know for a fact that the earth is greening; NASA satellites have measured it. We also know for a fact that crop production is setting records nearly every year in most countries. According to the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, they have very low confidence of any negative observed impacts between global warming and severe weather events. NASA satellites have measured a decline in global wildfires. We see beneficial impacts from more atmospheric carbon dioxide and warmer temperatures.

It is very important to have affordable and abundant energy; that’s the lifeblood of any economy. There’s a reason why in virtually every country in the world, new energy projects being built and being implemented are coal and natural gas, primarily. I don’t think that the leaders in virtually every country in the world lack intelligence; I don’t think they’re stupid. There’s a reason why coal and natural gas dominate energy production. If and when the day comes that wind power, solar power can compete with coal and natural gas, I’ll be the first one cheering them on.

You can read the rest of the article here.

4.8 21 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

153 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Donald B Thompson
Reply to  John Phillips
August 6, 2021 7:00 am

I do not like using the 30,000 scientists question human-caused climate change, because science is not about consensus but rather about creating hypotheses and then testing them. On this account, the models and climate change hysteria fail, and Taylor has the better argument.

On the other hand, ask Politifact to use the same methodology to analyze the 97% consensus claim.

MarkW
Reply to  John Phillips
August 6, 2021 7:56 am

politifact, now that’s funny.

John Phillips
Reply to  MarkW
August 6, 2021 11:04 am

Assuming the reference is to the Oregon Petition, why should anyone care about what a bunch of dentists, doctors, electrical engineers, physicians and veterinarians think about climate change? The only qualification needed to sign the petition was a Bachelor of Science degree or higher. In fact 0.5% of the signatories had a degree in climatology or atmospheric studies. Even if you include the disciplines they describe as ‘directly related to the physical environment of the Earth’ you can only get to 12%, fewer than the proportion with a Medical or Biology qualification.
 
According to figures from the US Department of Education, approximately 10.6 million science graduates have gained qualifications consistent with the polling criteria at a time that would make them eligible. So that’s a hit rate of around 0.3%.

And when you are soliciting opinion it is hardly best practice to include a cover letter and faked-up review article only supporting one side of the argument. That alone disqualifies the Petition as a serious survey of opinion.

MarkW
Reply to  John Phillips
August 6, 2021 1:13 pm

Once again, John displays the standard elitist attitude that only those who are anointed with the title of “Climate Scientist” are allowed to have an opinion on climate.

Anyone with a brain is capable of reviewing the evidence and forming an educated opinion.

Scratch a liberal and you will always find an elitist with totalitarian tendencies.

John Phillips
Reply to  MarkW
August 6, 2021 1:35 pm

It was Taylor who said they were scientists. The point is his mendacity in claiming that ‘More than 30,000 scientists have signed on to a paper.…’ as if that was at all meaningful. It may sound a lot but in context and over a decade it is a tiny tiny minority of those eligible. Secondly, simply holding a degree does not make you a scientist, as evidenced by the inclusion of dentists, chiropracters and veterinarians on the list. Thirdly it was deceptively marketed with an error strewn article which mimicked the layout and font of the Proceedings of the NAS (who swiftly issued a statement saying it was nothing to do with them).

The fact that Taylor relies on this discredited project speaks to the weakness of his position, in my opinion.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  John Phillips
August 6, 2021 2:31 pm

If only this type of scrutiny was applied to the false “90 % agree” BS…..

MarkW
Reply to  John Phillips
August 6, 2021 6:47 pm

Anyone who does science, is a scientist.

Most of the people you believe to be scientists, stopped being one years ago.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  John Phillips
August 6, 2021 1:57 pm

Science is not consensus.

Anthony Banton
Reply to  Tom Abbott
August 7, 2021 6:39 am

Of course it is!
It’s a consensus until some some other scientist comes along and publishes experimental results that is then verified by others.

People being people, there are ALWAYS contrarians.

However, anyway ….

https://psychology.wikia.org/wiki/Consensus_science

For example, the scientific consensus on Global Warming that it is happening and is primarily caused by human production of greenhouse gases would not be called “consensus science” if a scientific consensus is not the primary supporting argument. If conclusive evidence that Global Warming is occurring and caused by human activity has resulted in a scientific consensus on the issue, the conclusive evidence is the main support rather than the consensus itself so the term “consensus science” would not apply.

Coach Springer
August 6, 2021 5:41 am

Even if it were an emergency, it isn’t man made and we can’t stop it.

2hotel9
Reply to  Coach Springer
August 6, 2021 7:47 am

Dingdingding!!! We have a winner!

August 6, 2021 5:43 am

Global warming. The gift that keeps on giving.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1473235/europe-freeze-over-atlantic-ocean-system-collapse-gulf-stream-amoc-scn

just more hype on the buildup to Glasgow.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  JeffC
August 6, 2021 2:39 pm

Obvious what is happening here. They are getting scared that the GSM might be real, and their entire GW propaganda might be revealed as a house of cards. So they are setting the stage that if we go into a new LIA, it will of course be further proof of AGW. Can you sense the desperation becoming stronger and stronger? That Newsweek would even consider publishing an actual debate on AGW, with a strong proponent on the anti side, shows they know they are suddenly losing the argument.

Bill Rocks
August 6, 2021 7:44 am

Thank for the informative post. The 3rd paragraph is repeated, above.

Tom Abbott
August 6, 2021 1:19 pm

Don’t take downvotes seriously unless they number more than five. There are at least five non-serious trolls who hang out here, and something you wrote may have set one of more of them off. Notice, they did not make a reply. Why not, if they disagree? Maybe they don’t really have a reasonable argument to make.

leitmotif
August 6, 2021 2:27 pm

Heather Goldstone: A disgraceful human being.

No evidence, no arguments, no self-awareness, no ethics, no responsibility, no shame

JimW
August 8, 2021 12:28 am

The consensus among thinking people seems to be: Climate change is a given, not a problem. CO2 mitigation is a problem, not a solution.

Russell Johnson
August 8, 2021 1:10 pm

The emergency is whether or not we kick their lying globalist asses out of power before the Leftist Communist Bidet admin
passes Draconian laws to screw us all!!