Typically I get this question by grandparents anxious about the future of their grandchildren. After all, scientists are saying we are doomed if we do nothing. This is an excellent question and it needs a response.
The first thing that we should examine is why the scientists are claiming CO2 is the problem, assuming there is one. The answer is simple. Despite the length of the IPCC 4th Assessment Report, the whole thing boils down to one simple fallacy. There is a chart of climate forcings and the Sun’s effect is approximately negligible. The effect of CO2 and all of the positive feedbacks is the dominant driving force. There are three problems regarding this chart. The first is the models used to evaluate the feedbacks don’t work. A main deficiency is their handling of clouds. The second is they fail to include the negative feedbacks for which the Earth is famous. The third is the claim that if the Sun couldn’t account for the warming, it must be CO2. That last one requires a tremendous leap of faith.
The premier question is why couldn’t the Sun be responsible? The answer is simple. Despite excellent scientist associated with the development of the report and many complaints about this very fact, the IPCC uses only the Solar Irradiance to evaluate the Sun’s effect on Earth. They ignore the reversing magnetic intensity and its effect on the Galactic Cosmic Rays and the solar wind.When the Sun is active as it was in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s and the magnetic polarity added to the Earth’s own, we were shielded from these extraterrestrial particles. The particles act as nuclei for water droplets and form clouds. Fewer particles, fewer clouds. The particular clouds formed by these particles are the lower lying ones and they shield us from the Sun resulting in cooler temperatures. Again, with fewer clouds, we get warming. An increase of just a few percent of cloud cover and we could go into an ice age. The recent changes in the Sun, including a reversal of its magnetic polarity as well as a significantly lower activity level, have led to a situation where more particles are hitting our atmosphere. This results in more cloud cover. Where you have cloud cover, all it takes is a change in temperature in the downward direction and you get precipitation. This has come in the form of Mobile Polar Highs hitting the jet stream. All this is controlled by the Sun and the Moon as demonstrated by Piers Corbyn in his successful long range forecasts.
The above is what the IPCC left out of their equation. That is one big omission!
The rest of the IPCC report talks about the changes in temperatures between the day and night, Polar bears and other wildlife being affected, glaciers melting, drinking water affected, droughts and floods and all manner of terrible events for which they have absolutely no evidence. The problem with all these events is they do not necessarily have anything to do with CO2. They could as easily be from any source of warming but CO2 is the only option recognized.
Beyond that, they bring in “tipping points” that have never existed despite CO2 concentrations of in excess of 4000PPM. We aren’t even to 400 PPM yet.
So why the problem? Most global warming supporters that understand the science know everything I have mentioned. One AGW supporter told a friend of mine that “it is a matter of doing the right thing for the wrong reason”. Another AGW supporter said that it may come to destroying the industrial civilization to save the planet. This is the real goal of the whole hype. They would like us to return to the life of a Bolivian villager. I actually read this in a recent article.
So for those concerned about the future of their progeny, I would ask, “Do you want future generations to live in a hut, huddled around a fire or do you want something better for them?”