Chapter 5 - Scientific Consensus
In 2003, Michael Mann, lead author of the IPCC report of 2001, whose flawed
graph has since been removed from all IPCC documentation because it was
causing an embarrassment to the organisation, said these words:
“It is the consensus of the climate research community that the anomalous warmth
of the late 20th century cannot be explained by natural factors, but instead
indicates significant anthropogenic, that is human influences.”
It is the consensus, according to Michael Mann. The word consensus, meaning
full agreement, gets banded about every time the Global Warming issue comes
up. A consensus on Global Warming. However, in reality there is no consensus on
Global Warming. At the very least, Michael Mann’s corrected graph should prove
that to us. The truth is that there are just as many scientists who reject the theory
of man-made, human-induced Global Warming, as there are scientists who agree
with it. This applies even within the panel of the IPCC, but not in the media. In
the media there is a definite consensus, because let’s face it, only one opinion of
Global Warming is worth reporting. Only one opinion feeds the pride of man
while demoting the power of God over His own creation, and that’s the opinion
the devil wants us to believe. It is a view which says that it is within man’s power
to bring down the temperature of the earth and that if he doesn’t, the results will
be catastrophic. A view which says that God’s system is out of control.
There are really only three aspects of Global Warming on which consensus has
been reached in the scientific community:
1. Average global temperatures are 0.6°C higher now than they were 100 years ago
2. Atmospheric CO2 has risen by 30% in the last 200 years
3. Greenhouse gases have a warming effect on the earth
The gases in the upper atmosphere create a perfect, living environment on the
earth. The earth’s atmosphere allows the short-wave heat radiation from the Sun
to pass through to the surface. Some of that heat is then reflected back off the
surface of the earth again, with some atmospheric gases absorbing the radiation,
preventing that heat from escaping again. The gases which absorb the most radiation from the Sun are known as greenhouse gases. Without these gases, and
therefore without the so-called greenhouse effect, the temperature on the earth
would be about 30°C less than it is now. Without this phenomenon man could
not survive. That’s no coincidence. God created the firmament, the atmosphere,
in Genesis chapter 1, and He maintains its perfect balance right up to this day.
The breakdown of gases in the atmosphere
is shown on the right. You can see that
nitrogen makes up 77% and oxygen
contributes 21%. It is worth noting that all
the elements in the atmosphere contribute
somewhat to the greenhouse effect, but
those elements which are believed to absorb
the most radiation from the Sun are labelled
here as greenhouse gases and come in third,
just over 1% of the earth’s atmosphere.
That’s not a big percentage considering the fuss that’s made about them, and when
we break that down even further, we see that carbon dioxide, the infamous supervillain
of the whole Global Warming story, really doesn’t hold as much weight as
we might have thought.
Carbon dioxide makes up less than 4% of
all greenhouse gases, which actually works
out at 0.038% of the earth’s atmosphere.
0.038%, that’s all. The suggestion of the
Sun, a huge flaming ball in space, burning
at 5,500°C, having something to do with the
temperature on our relatively small planet
is rejected by the media and the IPCC, for
what? 0.038% of the earth’s atmosphere!
It is true that carbon dioxide, CO2, has increased by 30% over the last 200
years. However, all that means is that in 200 years we have moved from a CO2
concentration of 0.03% to a CO2 concentration of 0.038%. That’s what all the fuss
is about! That’s why we should close the factories, that’s why we should ban cars,
that’s why we should stop using patio heaters, because of a 0.008% change in the
earth’s atmosphere over 200 years. This is also why some very foolish Christians
are running campaigns called ‘What Would Jesus Drive’. Such a thing is a great
insult to our Lord and Saviour.
Of course, I don’t expect Big Bang believing scientists to see it that way. In an
evolutionary system, originating from an explosion, the resulting environment
is unstable. In an unstable environment, a 0.008% change is a big change.
Anything could happen, the system itself is unpredictable. But we don’t believe
in an evolutionary system, nor do we believe in an unstable environment. We
believe in the One who holds it all together in His hand. The system is secure. The
environment that we live in is stable. A 0.008% change is not going to shake the
foundations of God’s creation.
So why carbon dioxide? Why are we being told that it is all down to carbon
dioxide? Firstly, the earth is getting warmer, and man needs a reason. Greenhouse
gases regulate the temperature of the earth, and so it’s the greenhouse gases that
must now be malfunctioning. After all, in man’s opinion, they are only there by
chance, so there is just as much chance that one day they are going to go wrong.
And if you believe evolutionary theory, that is the natural assumption. But then
they take a look at the proportions of greenhouse gases and see that water vapour
makes up 96% alone. What can man do about water vapour?
Ecclesiastes 1:7 tells us:
All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from
whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
It’s a cycle, another one. The water vapour in the atmosphere, condensation, cloud
formation, they are all part of a cycle. A cycle that man cannot influence, a cycle
that has existed from the beginning of time, God’s perfect climate system. Man
knows he has no control over the water cycle, but CO2, maybe, just maybe he can
change that, and so poor old carbon dioxide gets the blame.