Now on ScienceBlogs: The Heaving, Voluptuous Breasts of the IPCC Chief

Enter to Win

The Island of Doubt

An irregular exploration of the struggle between the power of rational discourse and the scientific method on one hand, and the forces of superstition and dogma on the other. Mostly regarding climate change, though.

Profile

me-fergus.jpg James Hrynyshyn is a freelance science journalist based in western North Carolina, where he tries to put degrees in marine biology and journalism to good use.

Search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Other Doubtful Blogs

Inspiration

The Demon-Haunted World:
Science as a Candle
in the Dark, by Carl Sagan
(A review)

The Doubter's Companion:
by John Ralston Saul (Excerpts)

Skeptic Magazine: www.skeptic.com

Committee for the Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal: www.csicop.org

A poem by Yehuda Amichai:
The Place
Where We Are Right


The Meaning of the
Island of Doubt


Author's site: cyamid.net


Add to Technorati Favorites! Penetrating so many secrets, we cease to believe in the unknowable. But there it sits nevertheless, calmly licking its chops.
--- H. L. Mencken

By doubting we come to inquiry; and through inquiry we perceive truth.
--- Peter Abelard

Undisguised clarity is easily mistaken for arrogance.
-- Richard Dawkins

As for evolution, it happened. Deal with it.
-- Michael Shermer.

"There is no need to sally forth, for it remains true that those things which make us human are, curiously enough, always close at hand. Resolve, then, that on this very ground, with small flags waving, and tiny blasts of tinny trumpets, we have met the enemy, and not only may he be ours, he may be us."
--Walt Kelly

« The hazards of overstating the climate crisis | Main | Et tu BBC? »

Most bizarre argument against global warming alarmism ever

Category: climate
Posted on: October 9, 2009 7:46 AM, by James Hrynyshyn

Sugar-book author H. Leighton Steward, about whom I have written before, was on Capitol Hill this week arguing that rising CO2 concentrations are nothing to worry about. Among his claims is this, as reported by US News & World Report's Paul Bedard:

As an example, he said that Earth's atmosphere currently has about 338 [sic] parts per million of CO2 and that in Navy subs, the danger level for carbon dioxide isn't reached until the air has 8,000 parts per million of CO2.

If there was a prize for most irrelevant factoid ever offered in the history of climate change policy debates, other contenders might as well throw in the towel.

In case Bedard heard wrong, I checked Steward's website, which includes this gem:

Several studies have demonstrated, however, that these problems do not seriously impact human health until the air's CO2 concentration reaches approximately 15,000 ppm (Luft et al., 1974; Schaefer, 1982), which is approximately 40 times greater than its current concentration.

Tell me again, who is arguing that doubling the atmospheric CO2 concentration will cause direct harm to human health? Glenn Beck? Rush Limbaugh, maybe? I don't know whose actions are more puzzling: Steward's, for misleading representation of basic science or Bedard's, for uncritical reporting.

Share this: Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More

TrackBacks

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/121813

Comments

1

I don't care about global warming. I am, however, scared to death of the loss of my freedom by the socialist in chief. Keep up the good work Glenn Beck and Rush. We need some voices of sanity out there in liberal fantasy land.

Posted by: Rob | October 9, 2009 8:37 AM

2

Conservatives are so silly.....I hope you have no children Rob.

Posted by: Mr.Mom | October 9, 2009 8:40 AM

3

H. L. Steward just cured me of my Obama-honeymoon-is-over-and-what's-he-achieved cynicism.

When this kind of thing is being put to U.S. senators, the fact that the President has achieved not being a complete moron is quite enough for me.

Posted by: Neuroskeptic | October 9, 2009 8:42 AM

4

Rob, I'm ashamed to share a name with you.

You might find this an enlightening read, and perhaps learn something about yourself.

http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/admin/publication_files/resource-2590-2008.05.pdf

Posted by: Rob Girard | October 11, 2009 3:50 PM

5

It might be fun to calculate the climatic effects of atmospheric carbon dioxide at 8-15 ppk.

We might start with John Barnes's sf novel Mother of Storms (which includes, along with a single typhoon that kills a billion people, sly satires on heroic-engineer science fiction and a scarily-accurate parody of broadcast journalism), and them amp it up another order of magnitude.

Posted by: Pierce R. Butler | October 23, 2009 1:29 PM

Post a Comment

(Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





ScienceBlogs

Search ScienceBlogs:

Go to:

Advertisement
Collective Imagination
Enter to win the daily giveaway
Advertisement
Collective Imagination

© 2006-2009 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.