National Parks to Push Anthropogenic Warming

We are RVers and have made several cross -country trips across the US, stopping at national parks along the way. In our first three month cross county trip in 2008, most of the National Parks has a global warming display, mostly in the lobby of the visitor center. These displays focused on the anthropogenic contribution to warming. In 2011 when we made another cross country trip, we saw far fewer global warming displays, and those we did see we tucked in the back corner, no longer in the lobby.

But, we will soon see the return of the anthropogenic global warming displays, demonstrating how humans are destroying the planet with CO2 emissions. There is a new effort afoot to educate national park visitors on anthropogenic global warming.

The National Park Service trains staff to talk to visitors about global warming; an initiative that has won support in the highest reaches of the administration. Earlier this month, the White House issued a directive asking the Park Service to create a national blueprint for climate education. Park rangers won’t be required to teach climate change. But officials say the project will encourage parks to up their educational offerings.

I have always use the opportunity to test how much the Park Rangers new about the science behind global warming and found most of them did not know much, only the talking point they had been given. If accosted by a Park Ranger in the coming year, I suggest you test their knowledge on the science of global warming. Of course that assumes you know the science. And having some tidbits of knowledge to share like, no warming in 18 years, sea level rise is not accelerating, quietest hurricane season in nine years, food production is up 15% due to increased CO2 levels, climate related deaths have been in decline since the 1930s, Antarctic ice is highest level since measurements started, Arctic ice has stopped melting and has reached normal levels, and the list goes on.

About Russ Steele

Freelance writer and climate change blogger. Russ spent twenty years in the Air Force as a navigator specializing in electronics warfare and digital systems. After his service he was employed for sixteen years as concept developer for TRW, an aerospace and automotive company, and then was CEO of a non-profit Internet provider for 18 months. Russ's articles have appeared in Comstock's Business, Capitol Journal, Trailer Life, Monitoring Times, and Idaho Magazine.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to National Parks to Push Anthropogenic Warming

  1. Jon says:

    Why wouldn’t they talk about settle science? The CEO of Squaw Valley just spoke about it yesterday on Capital Public Radio. Yes, insurance companies, giant ski resorts and national weather services have long ago accepted the settled science.


    • Russ Steele says:

      Jon, there is no such thing as “settled science” there is only proven science. Proven by using the scientific method of validating or disproving a hypothesis using real world data. Not computer models, but real world data.

      In the attached analysis Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, AMS Fellow took a look at the IPCC based science. He did not attempt to address the issues of sensitivity for CO2 or solar and cloud and water vapor feedbacks relative to the models. He also ignore the many model shortcomings – like inability to forecast regional patterns, ocean oscillations, etc. Each of these alone discredit the consensus of “settled science”.

      He focused on how actual data compares to the consensus science, model based virtual world view of climate, look at some of the major findings, assessments or model predictions from the IPCC and other national climate centers and NGOs, that he, and his fellow skeptics, believe have failed and let you the reader decide whether or not the settled science and model projections should be the bedrock on which to base public policy.

      The ten issues:

      1. Warming is said to be unprecedented and accelerating. It is neither.

      2. Global warming is not GLOBAL

      3. Winters would grow increasingly warm

      4. The entire Northern Hemisphere would experience less snow and snowcover

      5. The arctic oscillation (AO) would become increasingly positive, aiding in the warming

      6. Global warming would lead to a permanent or semi-permanent El Nino

      7. Atmosphere will warm faster than surface (because that is where the heat trapping gases are). Not happening.

      8. Record highs and heat waves are increasing.

      9. Sea levels are rising at an increasing, alarming rate

      10. Droughts and floods will worsen

      The analysis is in each one of the Parts one and two below:

      Click to access The_failures_part_1.pdf

      Click to access The_failures_part_II.pdf

      Let me know if you still believe the science is settled. If you do pleases explain why, and support your argument with some facts.


Comments are closed.