Global warming is the rapid increase in temperature since the late 19th century that most experts agree is caused by fossil fuel use. However, some argue that warming is a natural cycle and that its severity has been exaggerated, and the debate continues.
According to the dictionary definition, global warming is an increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s surface. While warming has been observed at various times since the beginning of time, the current global warming that the world is focusing on refers to the rapid increase in average temperature that began in the late 19th century. Many point to the use of fossil fuels as the primary cause of this rapid rise in temperature, with evidence that the use of fossil fuels such as oil and coal since the Industrial Revolution has increased the concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), when comparing the global average annual temperature in the late 19th century to today, the temperature has increased by about 0.6°C. These rising temperatures are causing drastic changes to natural ecosystems, both on land and in the oceans, altering the habitats of many plants and animals and pushing many species to the brink of extinction. In addition, glaciers are melting and sea levels are rising, deforming coastlines and putting islands like the Maldives at risk of flooding. While many organizations and experts have argued that the warming up to the first half of the 19th century was part of a natural cycle, since the late 19th century, human activities have caused the warming, and they are calling for action.
Fred Singer and Dennis Avery, the authors of Unstoppable Global Warming, however, challenge this assertion head-on. They point out that the negative effects of global warming have been exaggerated and have been observed before. They argue that the global warming the world is currently facing is a cyclical phenomenon that has happened before and is perfectly natural.
Their argument is based on the following points. First, the authors argue that sea level rise is not happening. While many experts say that global warming will cause sea levels to rise, submerging islands and causing many catastrophic events, the authors explain that actual satellite observations show that global warming is causing far less sea level rise than the IPCC and environmental organizations like the EPA have claimed. The IPCC and EPA’s data can be derived by considering only the amount of glacier melt as the average global temperature rises, but as glaciers melt, the evaporation of moisture from the atmosphere increases, leading to more cloud cover, which in turn creates new glaciers and ice caps. In the end, the scientific evidence shows that the amount of glaciers is maintained to some extent by the circulation of ocean water, emphasizing that the authors did not select data with a particular trend. The authors also use the example of Tuvalu, which is sinking, to refute the claims of experts. While experts claim that Tuvalu is sinking due to sea level rise, satellite observations show that it is actually the result of land subsidence, not sea level rise.
The authors also refute the possibility of a rapid cooling of the planet. Many people believe that global warming increases the average temperature of the planet, but the authors argue that this is not the case. Rather, they explain, as global warming accelerates, it becomes harder for ocean currents to transfer heat, causing temperatures to continue to rise in the tropics and fall in the polar regions. Experts predict that these changes will eventually return most of the world to an ice age climate, which will make agriculture difficult and lead to catastrophic events such as massive population declines. Given that previous records have seen a drop of as much as 27 degrees Fahrenheit in just a few years, they argue that this process will happen rapidly. However, according to the authors, the flow of ocean currents has increased rather regularly during the recent warming period. This means that there is no problem with the heat cycle of the ocean currents, and when simulations based on these facts were run to predict future outcomes, they found that such an event is unlikely to occur. The Hadley Research Center’s simulation study showed that future ocean current heat cycling tended to increase, not decrease, so there would be no dramatic changes in climate, such as a 10-degree increase in average temperature in a decade, as claimed by experts. Rather, the authors point out that the claims made by experts are just a way to raise research funding.
Finally, the authors point to the extreme weather events we are currently experiencing. Every summer, we experience squalls and frequent showers that are typical of tropical climates. Squalls, hurricanes, and other extreme weather events are happening all over the world. While experts claim that these events are the result of global warming, the authors argue that what we call “extreme weather” is actually just a repetition of what has always happened throughout history: the cycles of extreme weather events are synchronized with the cycles of warming, and since climate events are caused by regional differences in the amount of sunlight over time and seasons, they are bound to be related to warming. Because records show that these events have occurred before, experts say it’s not plausible to attribute extreme weather to global warming.
The authors argue that many of the events that are currently thought to be caused by global warming, and those that are likely to occur, are either not caused by global warming or are not actually happening. The authors do not deny global warming per se, but rather deny the serious consequences of warming. The authors refute the claim that some of these events are related to global warming, and they claim to have provided ample evidence to support their claims. However, the book does not make clear that global warming itself is not happening, and the lack of statistical data leaves much to be desired. I agree with the authors’ arguments and would like to strengthen them by filling in the gaps.
I have found that there are many experts who agree with the author and have also argued that global warming is a hoax. Their call for alternatives to global warming is ultimately a political tool to stop the use of carbon dioxide and fossil fuels. There is a counterexample to the data presented by organizations and experts claiming global warming is real. They claim that global average annual temperatures are rising, causing shorter winters and ice to freeze 5.8 days later and melt 6.5 days earlier. They emphasize the fact that glaciers continue to melt by pointing out that since 1966, snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere has decreased by 5% per year, Arctic ice in summer is 7.4% less than it was a decade ago, and Arctic sea ice extent has decreased by 2.7%. However, these data are biased in favor of certain claims. Other data shows that Greenland’s average temperature has actually decreased since 1937, and that Antarctica’s peripheral glaciers are spreading cooling. Furthermore, between 1987 and 1998, the average global temperature actually decreased by 0.008°C. Contrary to claims that polar species are endangered due to melting glaciers and loss of habitat, data shows that polar bear populations are now five times larger than they were in 1975. In support of this, according to a Fox News article, ice in the Arctic Ocean increased by 60% in 2013 compared to the previous year. Furthermore, Fyfe et al. (2013) point out that the warming trend has slowed down enough to be considered cyclical.
Taking these facts into account, it is clear that the current evidence base for global warming claims is biased. When analyzing the data as a whole, there is no clear indication that global warming is occurring. The column goes on to say that the increase in carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas caused by fossil fuel use, is also misleading. Carbon dioxide makes up only 0.00127% of the Earth’s atmosphere, so it doesn’t contribute to the greenhouse effect. A study by Craig D. Idso et al. (2013) also supports this claim, finding no correlation between temperature changes over the past 150 years and carbon dioxide emissions from human activities. The author of the column interprets the reasons for claiming global warming when it is not actually happening as political. He also suggests that academics who claim global warming is happening, like the authors of the book, are just doing it to get funding.
As mentioned earlier, the evidence that global warming is actually happening is unclear. All climate data can be interpreted either in favor of global warming or against it. In this regard, some people view the global warming debate from a neutral perspective. They argue that the global warming debate is fundamentally about uncertainty in science. In 2004, climatologist Oreskes published a paper in Science to demonstrate that global warming is a definite phenomenon, which led to a consensus among many climatologists. This brought the issue of global warming to the attention of the general public, and the debate was in full swing. However, as mentioned above, some of the data does not support global warming, and it has been found that some experts have used biased data. In 2009, the global warming debate was reignited when emails revealed that IPCC climatologists were interpreting and manipulating data to extreme extremes. In the end, the global warming debate was caused by the collusion of some experts who excluded scientific uncertainty. In reality, claims and judgments about global warming can only be made through global statistics and scientific analysis. From this perspective, the claim that global warming is not happening is based on the lack of validity of the data that suggests it is.
In conclusion, global warming is not as serious as the experts perceive it to be. The data that experts use to argue that global warming is happening is biased, and the phenomena that are claimed to be caused by global warming are either completely natural or not happening at all. We are in the midst of the Earth’s cyclical climate fluctuations, and we are just living through a warm period.
