Following in the footsteps of Stanford University’s Stephen Snyder, who told Discover magazine in 1989 that “to capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance between being effective, and being honest,” Professor Daniel Caton, of the somewhat less prestigious Appalachian State University, twists many facts and ignores many others in his attempt to strike this balance. Writing in today?s Charlotte Observer, Caton misstates fact after fact. He claims that global temperatures and CO2 are ?rising in lockstep?. But satellite and weather balloon data show no warming trend since 1979. The only data set that shows any warming is generated from the less accurate ground level thermometers. These measurements leave out major portions of the earth?s surface, i.e., the oceans, and suffer from the ?heat island effect.? This is the warming effect that is caused by suburbanization around airports and other locations where these readings are taken. But even this data have not moved in ?lockstep? with CO2 increases. Most of the temperature rise of the last 100 years came in the first 50 of those years, before significant increases in CO2. Caton says we should act on the ?best data at hand,? when arguing in support of the Kyoto Protocol, but he ignores the best data on global temperatures. He also ignores the ?best data? (see Thomas Wigley, Geophysical Research Letter, 1998) regarding the climatological effects of Kyoto which suggests would produce a minuscule 13/100th of a degree (F) temperature reduction by 2050. Also, the best economic data, calculated by the Clinton Administration?s Dept. of Energy, shows this would cost a whopping 4% of GDP to accomplish.
Canton states, ?the role of man made carbon dioxide [in global climate change] is agreed upon by most scientists and most scientific bodies and organizations.? Again he is apparently trying to ?strike a balance between being effective and being honest.? This flies in the face of what was reported by Professor Richard Lindzen, MIT Professor of meteorology and member of the National Academy of Sciences panel on climate change, who states ?there is no consensus about long-term climate trends and what causes them?I cannot stress enough, we are not in a position to confidently attribute past climate change to carbon dioxide or to forecast what the climate will be in the future.?
