Green Drivel Exposed
By
      
      
       
      
        
      
      
      
      
       
       
        
        
         Lorrie Goldstein 
        
        
      
     
     
      ,Toronto Sun 
Saturday, June 23, 2012 
Two months ago, James Lovelock, the godfather of global warming, gave
 a startling interview to msnbc.com in which he acknowledged he had been
 unduly “alarmist” about climate change.
The implications were extraordinary.
Lovelock is a world-renowned scientist and environmentalist whose 
Gaia theory — that the Earth operates as a single, living organism — has
 had a profound impact on the development of global warming theory.
Unlike many “environmentalists,” who have degrees in political 
science, Lovelock, until his recent retirement at age 92, was a 
much-honoured working scientist and academic.
His inventions have been used by NASA, among many other scientific organizations.
Lovelock’s invention of the electron capture detector in 1957 first 
enabled scientists to measure CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons) and other 
pollutants in the atmosphere, leading, in many ways, to the birth of the
 modern environmental movement.
Having observed that global temperatures since the turn of the 
millennium have not gone up in the way computer-based climate models 
predicted, Lovelock acknowledged, “the problem is we don’t know what the
 climate is doing. We thought we knew 20 years ago.” Now, Lovelock has 
given a follow-up interview to the UK’s Guardian newspaper in which he 
delivers more bombshells sure to anger the global green movement, which 
for years worshipped his Gaia theory and apocalyptic predictions that 
billions would die from man-made climate change by the end of this 
century.
Lovelock still believes anthropogenic global warming is occurring and
 that mankind must lower its greenhouse gas emissions, but says it’s now
 clear the doomsday predictions, including his own (and Al Gore’s) were 
incorrect.
He responds to attacks on his revised views by noting that, unlike 
many climate scientists who fear a loss of government funding if they 
admit error, as a freelance scientist, he’s never been afraid to revise 
his theories in the face of new evidence. Indeed, that’s how science 
advances.
Among his observations to the Guardian:
(1) A long-time supporter of nuclear power as a way to lower 
greenhouse gas emissions, which has made him unpopular with 
environmentalists,  Lovelock has now come out in favour of natural gas 
fracking (which environmentalists also oppose), as a low-polluting 
alternative to coal.
As Lovelock observes, “Gas is almost a give-away in the U.S. at the 
moment. They’ve gone for fracking in a big way. This is what makes me 
very cross with the greens for trying to knock it … Let’s be pragmatic 
and sensible and get Britain to switch everything to methane. We should 
be going mad on it.” (Kandeh Yumkella, co-head of a major United Nations
 program on sustainable energy, made similar arguments last week at a UN
 environmental conference in Rio de Janeiro, advocating the development 
of conventional and unconventional natural gas resources as a way to 
reduce deforestation and save millions of lives in the Third World.)
(2) Lovelock blasted greens for treating global warming like a religion.
“It just so happens that the green religion is now taking over from 
the Christian religion,” Lovelock observed. “I don’t think people have 
noticed that, but it’s got all the sort of terms that religions use … 
The greens use guilt. That just shows how religious greens are. You 
can’t win people round by saying they are guilty for putting (carbon 
dioxide) in the air.”
(3) Lovelock mocks the idea modern economies can be powered by wind turbines.
As he puts it, “so-called ‘sustainable development’ … is meaningless 
drivel … We rushed into renewable energy without any thought. The 
schemes are largely hopelessly inefficient and unpleasant. I personally 
can’t stand windmills at any price.”
(4) Finally, about claims “the science is settled” on global warming:
 “One thing that being a scientist has taught me is that you can never 
be certain about anything. You never know the truth. You can only 
approach it and hope to get a bit nearer to it each time. You iterate 
towards the truth. You don’t know it.” 

No comments:
Post a Comment