CARBON MYTH: TRUTH THRU REPETITION

Global warming, the frequent topic of discussions, have reached the stages of reasoned generalities as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) released its summary report based on speculations, conjectures, and unverified phenomena of nature. Much of the laws and facts presented are biased and geared towards the frightening effect on humans, particularly, the scare of rising sea levels which are frequently mentioned and sending horrifying effect; more when they alarmed that the low-lying areas will all submerged in water.

The IPCC report deals mainly on how to minimize carbon dioxide emission which are solely attributed to human misdeeds, and eventually obligating the participating countries to make it their policy of limiting carbon dioxide emission to a specified level. By following the IPCC's directions, these countries will impose penalties to their citizens who will disobey the specified carbon dioxide emission rules.

There is no dispute that there indeed a global warming -not unless all the published reports are false. We do not have to argue with the controversies created by economists or politicians. The significant proof -based on published observations- which cannot be contested are the remarkable melting of ice in the polar ice cap; the cascading glaciers towards the Atlantic; the partial thawing of the solidly frozen ice surrounding Iceland, Spitsbergen, and northern Europe; and the Vikings who are now cultivating and planting crops in Greenland which was previously prevented by 81 per cent ice cover.

The increase in sea level is quite an inconvenient standard to state that this is a sign of global warming as a result of melting ice. Not unless it can be shown that a certain island has been swallowed by the sea. The average elevation of the islands in the Republic of Maldives is 3 feet and there is no report that an island there has disappeared. It can not be opined further that there is unusual rising sea level much more when a high tide is being enhanced by the pull of the moon when it aligned with the sun influencing or contributing too much force on the sea.

The rise in temperature cannot be invoked either since a thermometer measuring the heat can be installed in a warm or cool places , hence the varying rise in temperature is unreliable, such as the IPCC's temperature assumption of 1.1 degrees centigrade to 6.4 deg. centigrade towards the 21st century. How about measuring the surface temperature in the middle of the ocean where there are no crowds or spectators applausing and screaming everytime Manny Pacquiao landed a solid punch at his opponent. Would it be the same as the temperature measured in the traffic of heat-emitting cars in the streets of Bangkok or in Manila?

The IPCC's climate scenarios are created by economists and not the scientists -which they always brand as skeptics- and all are speculative predictions. Take these IPCC's reports:

"3rd Assessment Report, 1990-2100: temperature - 1.4 deg. to 5.8 deg. centigrade sea level - 0.1 to 0.9 meters"

"4th Assessment Report, 1990-2100: temperature - 1.1 deg. to 6.4 deg. centigrade sea level - 18 cms. to 59 cms."

These are full of inconsistencies. Where did they measure the sea level? There are places where the sea level rises up to 50 feet during high tide like the bay in Nova Scotia and place like the French Polynesia where the rise is only a few inches.

The government representatives are indorsing the methods of IPCC in achieving consensus based on peer review, published scientific and technical literature, and relevant informations extended by authoritative organization. However, there are claims that such assessments are biased, exagerated, and leaning to some vested interest leading to a more important/beneficial issues such as carbon dioxide emission trading.

IPCC pinpointed carbon dioxide as the main greenhouse gas that effect global warming and that human activities are the main source. Why make carbon dioxide the culprit in global warming? CO2 is a mere 0.038 per cent of the atmospheric gases and greenhouse gases is only l % which is responsible to the greenhouse effect that reflect heat back to earth -the negative forcing is the one being absorbed by the atmosphere and the long-wave energy is the one being radiated back into space.

The earth's atmosphere is composed mostly of 99% nitrogen and oxygen and only 1% is the greenhouse gases. Of this one percent of greenhouse gases, about 65% is water vapor and the 35% are composed of carbon dioxide, methane, ozone, nitrous oxide, and the groups of flourinated gases. Water vapor is the most important part of greenhouse gas and 100 times more than the carbon dioxide. They keep on harping at carbon dioxide as the menace while it is the meanness of the greenhouse gases. It may be assumed that we are short, instead, of carbon dioxide for if we have more our earth must be more greener today as it is the vital necessity of every plant species.

Assuming the heat being radiated by the sun is constant and the radiative forcing is slow, then it is logical that the earth is gradually warming as it continuously absorbing the positive forcing energy provided by the sun. If this is not the case, then it is also logical that the sun is producing more heat energy as what is happening during the solar maximum which occur every 10 to 12 years. Take for granted that the negative forcing is being trapped by the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere and parts of the long-wave energy is reflected back to earth, then it will not take a long time the earth will overheat, explode, and disappear in the space.

But our earth existed billions of years ago and has maintained the radiative balance or equilibrium ever since. No one knows the causes of global warming. It is the property of the sun when it generates more solar energy and it is also the cycle of the earth by receiving and releasing the supplied energy. It is like a boiler that automatically releasing heat through exhaust valve that prevents overheating.

There is no significant warming ever recorded since the time of Galileo in 1610 when the solar furnace generated so much heat. Not even in about 450 million years ago when CO2 reached the level over ten times higher than today as claimed by Tim Patterson, professor of Paleoclimatologits of Carleton University. Not even in the writings of David B. Wake, expert in the evolution of amphibians, when he said that the lungless salamanders, during 70 to 80 million years ago, dispersed elsewhere due to global warming.

Earth heating and cooling is a natural cycle. Human is a tiny thing in the universe that existed in a short period of time. We can not be considered to be in a group-of-small-things so as to cause global warming.

(Data source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)