Unscientific claims
Re: "Follow the science", (PostBag, Feb 6).
J.C Wilcox writes a letter encouraging people to follow science. But the content of the letter simply gives the wrong science. The debate about the rising temperature of the Earth has nothing to do with being "woke" or anything similar. It is based on scientific measurements that are easy to check.
Oxygen is not part of this debate, as it does not influence the heating effect of sunshine. There also is so much of it (21% of the atmosphere). It is unmeaning to claim burning can use it up. No scientist ever warned about or indicated the possibility of zero oxygen. It is an impossibility for the next many billions of years.
The three main gases which affect the rising of the temperature are CO2, methane and water vapour. They work like the glass in a window: The short-waved rays from the sun go straight through. Inside they hit something and are transformed to heat and heath ray that is long ray. They cannot get out again through the glass -- and instead, give away their energy to turn into more heat. A glass house or your living room with big windows may be pretty hot if the sun is strong. Because of those three gases, Earth is a glasshouse. The heat rays stopped from leaving the atmosphere turn the air warmer. Simple mathematics and physics.
Of the three gases, man mainly produces CO2. (And indirectly some water vapour, as higher temperature gives more such. Rising temperatures or drying of the soil may also release some methane.
The content of CO2 in the air before man started industry, was some 278 ppm (parts per million) or 0,00278%. Today it is some 417 ppm; it has risen some 50% these 200-300 years. In my cold country (Norway) we know that more insulation gives warmer flats. The same goes for Earth. Over these last 150 years, Earth has become 1C warmer.
Also, to claim that some are working to get zero CO2 is illogical. Nature is adjusted to CO2 around 280ppm. Science wants a CO2 concentration like "the normal". Diverging much from that can trip the ecological balance. Besides, to talk about zero CO2 in the air is unscientific because nature releases a lot every day -- ie from materials rotting. It was nature which kept CO2 quite stable before industrialisation. That said, zero CO2 is an impossibility, and no scientist has ever wanted it.
The temperature of the Sun may vary. But no such rise which can explain the rise of the temperature on Earth, especially in the last 150 years, has been reported. The Milankovitch cycles may also give temperature variations, but over geological time periods, not over centuries.
The eccentricity of Earth's travel around the Sun: One point is that it is small (some 3% now). Another is that the maximum and minimum distance from the sun happens once a year. The tilt of Earth's axis has no effect on how much warmth Earth gets from the sun, as Earth's profile as seen from the sun is just as big no matter how the axis tilts. Also, the tilt may influence weather at some level, but not the total warmth from the sun -- and during periods of 26,000 years, not centuries.
Yes, follow science, not the makers of unscientific claims and "hypotheses".
Martin A Engeset
