Reiner Hollbach

 The National Post recently published a letter from Kaslo, B.C. which reads in part as follows:<Nov 30 may be one of the most significant turning points in human history. It marks the opening to the Paris summit on climate change …….. Today we are close to the deadline proposed so many years ago. 2020, the year of no return, the year when stabilization targets must be met. The data show, if no action is taken, our trajectory will lead to a 6C increase in global temperatures by 2100 ……. But there is still time ….. to avert the potentially catastrophic tipping point…>’

A cris de ceur from the grassroots. This letter writer should, however, feel reassured to know that the campaign to head off climate change at the pass counts among its supporters none other than President Obama, the Commander-in-Chief of the world’s most powerful nation.

. Indeed, publicity emanating from the White House strongly indicates that, at the upcoming Paris conference, Obama plans to personally lead the world-wide charge in the fight against climate change. And this campaign has almost the entire mainstream media behind it, including such august organs as the New York Times, The Economist and, of course, the Globe and Mail. So who is to take exception to that campaign? Well, it seems that there still are a few intrepid souls out there who dare to strike a dissonant cord. In fact, this small band of dissidents is gaining in strength, both in terms of numbers and in terms of substantive arguments.

I’ve been following this debate for a number of years, albeit in a rather haphazard manner. So last summer I decided to take a closer look at the data and hypotheses giving rise to the alarm over climate change, particularly the physics and chemistry of the processes involved, as well as paleo-climate records. This turned out to be a fascinating journey of discovery which I have endeavoured to distil onto the pages of an essay. 

In brief, there are two parts to this essay. In Part I try to gain a better understanding of climate science, but proper science as opposed to pseudo-science. In that context it is glaringly obvious that (a) climate change per se isn’t really at issue – climate has always changed and will continue to change – and (b) the pivotal  issue is  the presence of CO2 asa greenhouse gasin the atmosphere, and humans adding lots of CO2 by burning fossil fuels, the principal cause of global warming.  Conclusion reached: anthropogenic CO2 emissions are not guilty as charged. In Part II I am trying to get my mind around the question as to why Western countries accept so willingly the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming hypothesis in the face of so much scientific evidence to the contrary, and how this conundrum might be resolved. 

Click pdfhere if you wish to download a PDF version of my essay. I can also recommend that you read a speech given by Patrick Moore, the founder of Greenpeace, which you can access here.

Final note: My essay was completed before the publication of Michael Hart’s Hubris – The Troubling Science, Economics and Politics of Climate Change. It provides a very detailed, lucid and superb overview of all facets of a highly complex and controversial issue.  I can strongly recommend it.

Arthur Reiner Hollbach

Tags: Reiner Hollbach