Latest posts by Donald Kendal (see all)
- In The Tank (ep174) – Stopping Socialism Part 2: Full Socialism Is Evil Presentation - January 18, 2019
- In The Tank (ep173) – Impossible Green New Deal, ESAs in Tennessee, and Unconstitutional Obamacare - January 11, 2019
- In The Tank (ep172) – Human Freedom Index, China, Nuclear Power, and Automation - January 4, 2019
A recent article published by Forbes by Heartland Institute Senior Fellow James M. Taylor has been causing quite a stir. The article titled “Updated NASA Data: Global Warming Not Causing Any Polar Ice Retreat,” highlights the fact that global warming is not causing arctic melting that so many alarmists fear.
In the article, Taylor notes that the initial baseline for the ice extent was set in 1979 when the ice was “abnormally extensive.” But even recent satellite measurements show little change from this abnormally high baseline. As Taylor points out, this flies in the face of those, including Al Gore, who predicted an ice free Arctic by the year 2014.
The article has been very popular. It has been shared nearing 90,000 times and has had nearly 300,000 views. The article was even featured in a recent episode of the Mark Levin Show. You can listen to the clip above. But as you can imagine, the article did not sit well with climate activists.
In the wake of the Taylor article, climate alarmist Chris Mooney authored a response article published by the Washington Times. In this article, Mooney attempts to make the claim that global ice is in retreat. He states “Taylor doesn’t appear to distinguish between what’s happening to sea ice in the Arctic and the Antarctic.”
After the release of the Mooney article, Taylor decided to respond. In his response article titled “The Climate Alarmists’ Latest Argument About Polar Ice – And Why It’s Wrong,” Taylor dissects each argument point by point. He concludes by stating, “the objective fact remains that the short-lived, minor decline (mearly 10%) in polar ice extent is over, is now fully recovered, and has been since 2012.”
The back and forth has been a great thing to watch as the climate change debate goes on.