Part 1 – Thorner: Global warming debate emphasizes vast scientific opinion differences
September 24, 2013
Monday, September 23, 2013
On Monday, September 16th, a debate took place in the Wilmette Public Library on the topic of Global climate variations: A looming crisis or natural changes. The debate was between Steve Goreham, a speaker and researcher on environmental issues and author of two books, the most recent, The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania, and Kent Taylor, a long-time resident of the Chicago area, a 20-year volunteer at the Shedd Aquarium as a lecturer on coral reef ecology, and now an Al Gore-trained presenter through Gore’s Climate Reality Project to spread Gore’s message of anthropogenic (manmade) global warming.
Of interest was how Ken Taylor became an Al Gore global warming presenter. It all started when Taylor and his wife visited St. John’s National Park. A year later, when again exploring the same reef formations, they found that over a period of just one year 50 to 60 percent of the reef had been lost, prompting Mr. Taylor to conclude that if nothing were done St. John’s coral reef formations would be lost. In 1996, learning that Al Gore was seeking volunteers to be presenters for The Climate Project, Taylor applied and was chosen to participate in a three-day training session in Nashville, Tennessee, to master Al Gore’s global warming slide presentation.
The Wilmette debate was a timely one given the release a day later, September 17th, of the newest volume in the Climate Change Reconsidered series by the Heartland Institute and members of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), which challenges the United Nation’s International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC – AR5) report scheduled for release tomorrow, Sept. 24, in Stockholm, Sweden. The U.N. IPCC AR5 is supported by governments in almost every county in the industrialized world, including the Democrats in America and the Obama administration.
Despite leaked conclusions of the 2013 IPCC report to The Daily Mail in England contradicting many of the doom and gloom scenarios projected in the lauded 2007 U.N. IPCC report, what might the odds be that the new findings will throw a monkey wrench to alter the thinking of alarmists who believe that the science of global warming is settled — that the debate is over — as physics tells them so?
No chance, as the leaked 2013 IPCC report, although admitting that most of its major conclusions in 2007 were incorrect, still holds firmly to the belief — with a certainty of 95% or more — that human action was the cause of half of the warming occurring from 1957 – 2001. Kent Taylor wavered very little in the debate as the presenter of Al Gore’s position on global warming.
The rules of the debate were set by Robert Armbruster, President of Armbruster Company, specializing in new works and restoration of historic concrete. Taylor and Goreham were each given 30 minutes to advance their positions on global warming, accomplished through detailed slide presentations. Following the presentations, a 10-minute rebuttal period was allotted each to counter the facts presented by their challenger. The event ended with a question and answer period.
Robert Armbruster cautioned those in attendance that he expected the debate to be civil in nature, which left no room for rabble rousing in keeping with Wilmette’s image and its people.
For the most part Armbruster’s caution was heeded, although the announcement to end the event to honor the closing time of the library did bring some vocal protestations from those who still had questions to ask of Goreham and Taylor. Evident was that the index card system used to note questions, which were then screened, was not well received by all.
For those present at the Wilmette debate who had knowledge of the global warming debate and all of its twists and turns, and who likewise have experienced the animosity and name-calling that goes along with being a skeptic who doesn’t accept the “science is settled argument” spewed forth regularly by the media, the debate was a no-brainer.
For readers who are less knowledgeable about global warming and the arguments used in trying to convince the public that global warming is either happening or it isn’t, the views expressed by Kent Taylor’s and Steve Goreham will be noted below each other in Part 2 so the two divergent and opposite viewpoints can readily be observed and evaluated.
Part 2 will explore three question through contrasting the global warming statements made by Kent Taylor (a believer) and Steve Goreham (a skeptic) during the course of the debate.
Monday, September 23, 2013 at 09:00 AM | Permalink