Water Vapor Study Proves Climate Change Skeptics Right?

Climate Change Debate Clouded by Misrepresentations

Don A Shepard
Rev up the Hummers, crank up the AC and leave the lights on all night because human induced climate change has been proven a myth. This is what the hard core anthropocentric climate change skeptics want you to think and they will use any shred of "evidence" to "prove" their point.

Study Basics

The latest "proof" being expounded on certain (generally conservative) blogs and news networks is an intriguing collaborative study conducted by scientists from NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory (ERSL), the University of Colorado, and the University of Bern. ERSL's site explains the research reveals that the 1980's and 90's experienced an increase in water vapor in the lower stratosphere (about ten miles up from the Earth's surface). However, since 2000, this level has been decreasing. More specifically, water vapor has decreased about 10% since that year. This fluctuation is occurring in areas where it is believed water vapor has big effects on climate change.

Al-Goreaphobia


There we have it folks, climate change is all just a giant hoax originated and perpetuated by Al Gore so he could get rich. Come on, this is giving the man a whole lot of credit, and my guess he was already rich before he made "An Inconvenient Truth". Granted, the film makes some spurious claims and makes some bold predictions that scientists really could not possibly make, and it needlessly added to the politicking of a scientific issues, but...wow, he must really be a political mastermind to pull off this scam. A political mastermind, who could not beat George Bush to become President of the United States, hardly deserves such recognition. Many climate change skeptics continue to place him on this pedestal of calculated shrewdness.

The Study's Climate Change Implications

Anyway, back to the issue at hand. According to the study's journal article abstract , the 10% decrease "acted to slowthe rate of increase in global surface temperature over 2000to 2009 by about 25% compared to that which would have occurreddue only to carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases." This seems to be completely ignored by the detractors. The ERSL article points out the researchers acknowledge they don't know the reason for the recent water vapor loss. I would not count on this trend to continue and offset the increase in greenhouse gasses so that the delicate climate balance can remain. Reinforcing this feeling is the fact that there is just not a whole lot of water vapor in the stratosphere to begin with, leaving us little room for more of this offsetting.

What this research does is reinforce that climate is a complex system that we do not fully understand. In addition, it confirms that climate prediction model accuracy leaves much to be desired because of these misunderstandings and general lack of data.

What this research does not change (or even claim to change) is the basic physics of greenhouse gasses. Increasing the amount of them in our atmosphere will no doubt alter our weather systems and long term climate.

Alternative Energies, Not Just for Climate Change "Alarmists"

In the mean time, even if you believe humans can not change the climate, or you simply don't care, consider all the other hideous environmental, health, and political issues fossil fuels cause, and leave the Hummer at the dealership. You can do this and still remain a climate change skeptic.

Published by Don A Shepard

Don writes for numerous online sources while conducting research for a Master's in Natural Resources/Environmental Management. He enjoys working on his urban homestead with his family, outdoor activities, mo...  View profile

9 Comments

Post a Comment
  • Lorraine Yapps Cohen5/20/2011

    If you believe Al Gore and the alarmists, then you are part of the problem. Read Will Happer (Princeton) for an authoratative treatise on CO2.

  • Starbuck10/10/2010

    Okay Don as you put it above "What this research does is reinforce that climate is a complex system that we do not fully understand. In addition, it confirms that climate prediction model accuracy leaves much to be desired because of these misunderstandings and general lack of data."

    Then why would you want to devastate the economy, based on your assumptions above, over an issue that is so complex and not completely understood. Don, it will be decades, many decades before Man even comes close to understanding the complex interactions of this biosphere and the answer will not come from these so-called ecologists (climatologists), but from decades of work from atmospheric physicists. Listen to the skeptics, this is what science is about Don, not your idle, Al Gore. The planet has a fever. Yes it does from morons who have displaced science with money hungry ecologists who are barely smarter than a gas station attendent. My appologies to the gas station attendents.

  • Catherine Dagger4/5/2010

    Anyone rational wants a clean environment. Unforgiveably, politics and money seem to hold up the development and availability of clean fuels. Plastic junk is my other bugbear. I agree though that we all tend to excuse our own transgressions from time to time... Just need to minimise them as far as we can.

  • Bethany Marsh2/22/2010

    Great article. Al Gore is an idiot, but human actions certainly do bring much devastation to the Earth, regardless of whether we create "climate change."

  • Don A Shepard2/21/2010

    There are whole fields now dedicated to understanding why people choose to rebel against environmentally friendly practices. I have also learned there is a disconnect between how we want to behave or how we percieve ourselves and how we really behave in terms of these behaviors. Some of it is thought to be a biological product of evoloution...get it now at any cost because this will help me survive or make me happier.

  • Geannie M. Bastian2/21/2010

    Seems to me, wether people believe in it or not is irrelevant. Making greener choices hurts nothing and may help. Both the planet and the pocketbook. So why not choose those greener things? Just to be obnoxious because you can? That makes sense.

  • Jeff Rogers2/19/2010

    Crank up the AC? Would that be Associate Content or Air Conditioning?

  • Michael Segers2/18/2010

    Good for you. The Republicans choose profit for big business over human life.

  • Jennifer Bove2/17/2010

    interesting write up

Displaying Comments

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.