Another Essay on Global Warming

Earlier this week, in a conversation that was intended as a humorous look at Global Warming in a winter of record low temperatures, I was accused of not knowing the difference between climate and weather.  Being the pig headed pseudo-scholar that I am I immediately consulted a dictionary.

I discovered the following from Webster’s Dictionary:

Climate –

1.  A region of the earth having specified climatic conditions

2. a. the average course or condition of the weather at a place usually over a period of years as exhibited by temperature, wind velocity, and precipitation

b. the prevailing set of conditions (as of temperature and humidity) indoors  climate-controlled office>

3. The prevailing influence or environmental conditions characterizing a group or period  

Weather –

1. The state of the atmosphere with respect to heat or cold, wetness or dryness, calm or storm, clearness or cloudiness

2. State or vicissitude of life or fortune

3. Disagreeable atmospheric conditions

Being thus fortified in my knowledge, I decided to rise above the current “weather” and to have a look back at the “average course or condition of the weather at a place usually over a period of years”.

The Western Region Climate Center provided me with data regarding Brownfield, Texas (where I live) from 1914 to 1954.  Unfortunately, for some unknown reason, they did not have the data from 1954 to the present date available.  Therefore, I sought out my data from weather.com for information on the last 30 years, 1980 to 2010.

My methodology was thus:

I took the average high temperatures and the average low temperatures from both data sets and created the table below:

Month	H1	H2	L1	L2
1	56	54	26	26
2	64	60	30	30
3	70	68	36	35
4	76	76	44	44
5	82	84	53	54
6	90	91	61	63
7	93	93	64	67
8	90	91	61	63
9	84	85	57	58
10	77	76	47	47
11	66	64	35	35
12	57	56	26	26

Utilizing this data, I averaged the monthly highs and lows for each data set.

Data set H1 (1914-1954) had an Annual Average High Temperature of 75.4F

Data set H2 (1980-2010) had an Annual Average High Temperature of 74.8F

Data set L1 (1914-1954) had an Annual Average Low Temperature of 45.3F

Data set L2 (1980-2010) had an Annual Average Low Temperature of 45.3F

By adding and averaging the complementary data sets (H1+L1) and (H2+L2) I discovered the following:

Annual Average Temperature for Data set One (H1+L1/2) was 60.35F

Annual Average Temperature for Data set Two (H2+L2/2) was 60.05F

This would indicate that the Annual Average Temperature for Brownfield, Texas has DECREASED .3 degrees in the past 96 years.

Now before any of you begin to rant and rave about me being a “denier” and a believer in a flat earth, let me share something that I was taught in Basic Statistical Analysis in college:

“Statistics can be made to exhibit ANY outcome desired.”

My desire was to show that there was NO global warming for the past 96 years.  Using the scientific method and carefully selected statistics, I have fulfilled my desire.

I am not a “scientist”, but I understand the scientific method.  I understand that science is the exploration of the unknown and that no answer or theory is permanent.  The concept that “Global Warming” is “settled science” is ridiculous. 

If there were such a thing as “settled science”, physics would have stopped with Einstein.

TRUE scientists are ALWAYS seeking a better answer, not trying to convince everyone that everything has been discovered, settled upon and all the questions answered.  They certainly do not try to hide data that conflicts with their theory as the climate researchers at the Climate Research Unit of the University of East Anglia, the propertied “experts” on climate change did.

TRUE scientists do not concoct easily disprovable but frightening stories about the melting of glaciers and the impending doom of rising sea levels inundating cities and countries and splash them theatrically across the movies, television, radio, internet and print media. 

They certainly don’t select a washed up politician who, by his own admission “did not do well in science classes while in college” to be their spokesperson.

Speaking as a Political SCIENTIST, one who studies politics, governments, governmental systems and the people who engage in them, I see politicians trying to lead, not by inspiration, not by explanation, but by fear mongering and half truths.  When these efforts do not succeed, they persist in their desires by implementing laws, rules and regulations IN SPITE of the public desire.

When that happens, it ceases to be about the possibility of a changing climate or dangers to our world and becomes all about CONTROL.

I for one believe that the government already has more than enough control of our lives.