On a System to Measure Climate Change

H₀: Human-generated C02 causes significant climate change.

We are unlikely ever to test such a scientific hypothesis properly. An effective, comprehensive biosphere energy-in-energy-out model would require substantial scientific understanding we do not currently possess. The timeline for measuring climate change is itself measured in billions of years and human activity that might affect it is only a minuscule portion of that — and the very tail end. 

But, we might still wish to develop a system for measuring climate change, and how rapidly it seems to be progressing toward some unliveable zone, to alert the citizens of the world to related danger.

Or, we might wish to develop a system for measuring climate change simply to counteract persistent efforts to connect human activity to dangerous change — with related efforts to control human behavior and economic activity — with the purported aim to save the world and its inhabitants from climate catastrophe.

Without such a system, which establishes an agreed protocol with governments and NGOs worldwide to . .

1. put climate activity today in historical perspective with earth's experience millions and billions of years back.
2. provide for consistent and even measurement of all relevant levels of the atmosphere (air), hydrosphere (water), and lithosphere (earth).

. . predictions of future catastrophe not based in any sort of scientific reality spin hysteria on conjecture founded only in speculation — becoming an out-of-control catastrophe-spinning machine which has no way of being reeled back in.

To this end, one of two outcomes of investing the time and money in developing such a system might suffice:

1. debunking the purported between human activity and climate change, or at least
2. defusing the related catastrophizing

It would likely be far less expensive than the alternative: massive governmental intervention in our lives and economic activity. Or transplanting ourselves to another planet.

We might also develop a better understanding of how natural events affect climate — volcano eruptions and "volcanic winter", for example — and how we might apply developing technology to mitigate their effect.


SEE ALSO:

• "The 10 Most-Respected Global Warming Skeptics" by Joe Weisenthal; Business Insider, July 30, 2009.
• "Understanding the Global Warming Debate" by Warren Meyer; Forbes, February 9, 2012.
• Global Warming, Dr. Roy Spencer, PhD. blog.
• "Denying the Catastrophe: The Science of the Climate Skeptic's Position" by Warren Meyer; Forbes, October 15, 2010.