In the article "No Surprise," by Ronald Bailey, he questions the truthfulness of the International Panel on Climate Change's (IPCC) research on global warming and its effects. Bailey, a renowned science correspondent for Reason magazine, has a main point of showing how the outcome of global warming on the environment won't be seen for hundreds of years. Although this little one degree Celsius change seems minor, it is enough to drastically alter plants and life. His key statements are that the statistics of the IPCC are very improbable, using a method of modeling that isn't even accurate with real-life situations, therefore, concluding that the predictions of the future are "way off," according to John Christy, a professor of Atmospheric Science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama at Huntsville. Although the United States is "pumping out" tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, there are also things in America, such as forests and farms, which help reduce the carbon dioxide.
Bailey -- Smith -- Weeks (LOC)
Madeline Bailey -- Mrs. Duryea -- WM.B. Bailey (L...
The "burning embers" diagram above was produced by...Bailey also points out that the outcome of global warming will not be apocalyptic, simply cooler days and warmer nights. Meanwhile, there is the fact that the IPCC's claims dealing with global warming do not agree with each other; therefore, the models are not an accurate future-reading device. It is also improbable for the IPCC's models to correctly indicate what the weather will be like a century from now, being as how the twentieth century's scientists couldn't have even fathomed the technology and atmosphere we have today. Ronald Bailey does agree that carbon dioxide will cause a temperature raise, but not in the correct amount that the IPCC wrongly promotes to fool the general public.
The articles overall effectiveness is high. The article, for several reasons, persuades me. First, the scientists of...