Return To C3 Headlines Main Page © Copyright 2009 - 2015 | C3 Headlines
First, you can reach the editor by email at 'C3headlines "at" gmail "dot" com'. And, if you have Twitter, you can follow C3H.
Banner image at top of each web page is a photo of Myrtle Beach 14th Street pier, taken by Alan2Onion.
In summary, 'C3' is an anonymous, opinionated average person-pundit who primarily reports on, and sometimes analyzes/investigates (see examples here), climate science issues that the traditional mainstream press fails to report on or misrepresents. 'C3' personally funds the blog's operating expenses (damn, no outside funding sources - c'mon Exxon, cough some moola up!).
Caution: www.c3headlines.com is an opinion/interpretation column based on available facts, evidence, information and other person's opinions.
'C3's' one-dozen opinions on climate change:
1. Climate change is always happening and will continue to do so. It is the natural order. No denial.
2. Natural global warming has been occurring since the end of the Little Ice Age, including the modern warming of the late 20th century. No denial.
3. Human CO2 emissions will cause some warming based on the widely-accepted logarithmic, physical response discovered by scientists (a 1 to 2 degree Celsius impact would not be a surprise by 2100AD). Other human factors definitely cause warming - black soot, deforestation, agriculture irrigation, paving over farmland, concrete/asphalt urban areas, etc. No denial. ('C3' is a 'luke warmer,' essentially.)
4. The CO2-induced warming will be minimized by natural negative climate feedbacks. The climate's natural feedbacks will overwhelm any positive feedbacks induced by humans.
5. There has been modest warming from CO2 since the 1970's, ending in the late 1990's. Since 1998, there has been essentially a flattening of temperature increases.
6. Global warming has not been "accelerating" as alarmists contend. Official climate models continue to project a speculative acceleration of warming that is simply counter to all empirical measurements.
7. Recent global warming was not "unprecedented," as warming during the 1930's was similar, and the warming during the Mid-Holocene/Minoan/Roman/Medieval periods were greater and longer.
8. Excessive, "runaway" global warming from the hypothesized positive feedback mechanism (the infamous "tipping point") claimed by alarmists is not currently happening, and highly unlikely to happen.
9. The UN's IPCC (and its associated scientists) has been dishonest at best in its portrayal of global warming and the severity of climate change consequences.
10. The disasterous predictions, CAGW, associated with climate model warming are not likely to happen; natural disasters from global cooling are more likely to happen in future.
11. Based on historical/ancient precedent and evidence, global cooling would be a far greater disaster for humanity if the natural climate cycle turns in that direction, such as it did during the Little Ice Age.
12. Global (regional and local) warming has many causes, including human caused, which are not well represented by the climate models, nor well understood by scientists yet.
'C3's' opinion on energy solutions:
'C3' likes 100% non-CO2, reliable 24/7, nuclear power generation solutions, especially the promise of newer nuke tecnologies. During an interim period, more natural gas should be utilized versus electrical generation by coal. Currently, today's renewable alternatives are not ready for prime time, and in many cases they are worse for the environment than present fossil fuel solutions.
Additional 'C3' background info:
As a person-pundit, we are especially fond of charts/graphs representing empirical data. We enjoy presenting information in different visual formats that readers may have not seen before, thus providing them a different viewpoint than that coming from government bureaucrats and green activists.
C3 is definitely a CAGW-skeptic; C3 does not believe in the non-scientific disaster "predictions" by Al Gore and others; C3 could be characterized as a mild 'luke-warmer'; C3 supports building a more carbon-efficient economy over the next few centuries (it ain't going to happen overnight).
On the political spectrum, C3 is of libertarian/conservative nature, favoring a strong defense, conservative fiscal policies, libertarian social policies and possessing, in general, 'a-smaller-government-is-a-better-government' attitude.
C3 is an early adopter of carbon-efficiency: We did the twisty bulbs years ago and replaced our 2 furnaces and water heater with the latest and greatest natural gas high-efficiency ones (our natural gas use plummeted after installation). In mid-2012, we purchased our second 40+ miles/gallon car - we acquired a Hyundai non-hybrid vehicle. (It gets low 40 miles/per gallon on highway if we are careful about cruising speed; so far, it's providing high 20's for urban stop/go traffic. Would not want to take a long trip in it, though - too uncomfortable.)
Sidebar: During 2011 we rid the house of all twisty bulbs (about 30). We didn't like the CFL light, and they never lasted as long as claimed. We returned to halogen and incadescent bulbs but added light-dimmer switches for all of the ceiling/wall lights, which has worked well for us - our electric bill was down 16% through the end of September 2011 as compared to the prior years of CFL hell.
And other thoughts/opinions:
Complete science knowledge and debate is critical to the major policy issues we face as a nation, including the issues of global warming and climate change. As our country has become even more politicized, we have advocacy groups on either side of an issue trying to throttle, if not entirely stop, issue debate and foreclose any attempts for the public to view or learn about the pros and cons of an opponent's issue stance.
We now see this same technique in the global warming debate where alarmist advocates insist on a single point of view of the science (the "Gore-Only" global warming education) and attempt to stop any other knowledge, empirical evidence, data, and etc. to be shared or disseminated (if you think this isn't happening, just visit a public school and talk to students taking a science course). This attempt by one-viewpoint only advocates on global warming was the primary reason for this web site to be created. View it as a source of opposing knowledge and debate - forbidden fruits, so to speak (for some, climate religion heresies) that less enlightened and less rational people try to keep you from consuming.
My own opinion (re-read above 12 points) is that the climate has a natural variability to it; continuously going through cycles that create change that we fully don't understand; natural earth cycles that are significantly way more powerful than human interventions; and, natural cycles and variability that humans can't change, let alone prevent. I am not terribly alarmed by this natural change (whether global warming or climate change) as humans have proven to be an incredibly adaptive species.
Global warming has been occurring for some 16,000+ years since the last ice age. During that long span, there have been lengthy periods when the earth has actually cooled or gone into an "accelerated" warming mode. Does natural CO2 or human generated CO2 cause the natural short and long-term cooling/warming trends? Based on all historical evidence, CO2 is not the culprit. Could CO2 be the cause of the most recent modest warming the earth has experienced over the last 150 years? Probably not, since this period of warming was the natural result of the Little Ice Age ending. Could CO2 have enhanced the present natural warming trend since WWII? Absolutely, but this recent warming has only generated at most a 6/10's of a degree Celsius increase over 50+ years, and in some areas of the world it was even less than that. So, if human CO2 had/has an impact on warming it is pretty trivial, and its impact appears to be more "regionalized" versus global (the Southern Hemisphere has not warmed; the U.S. has warmed less than Europe, etc.).
Of course, that is just one person's opinion and don't take it as gospel. If you question that opinion, do yourself a favor a read some of the scientific articles linked to by this site. An incredible wide variety of scientists firmly believe that human CO2 is not to be feared as the media would like us to believe. Better yet, look at the actual evidence - actual data measurements, not climate models' predicted outcomes. If real data in a visual format is preferred, click on the "Charts/Images" link at the top of any page and review actual data and evidence about both temperatures and CO2. This real data does not tell the story you hear on the evening news. If the data is eye-opening, read some linked articles and learn why real-world data is different that what you've been told by the celebrities and news reporters (let's cut them some slack, they're not exactly members of the "best & brightest" of our country).
One the most unfortunate elements of the entire global warming debate has been the use of fear-mongering, instead of evidence and data. The scientific community has been dragged down into the mud by politicians and celebrity-chasing individuals. Literally, fear-mongering is being used without shame, and pseudo-science is utilized to establish a veneer of justification for why citizens should be fearful. That's why C3 Headlines came into existence - to help educate, and hopefully, to combat the fear-mongering and Halloween-ish movie scare tactics.
Over the last couple of years, there has been excellent information published on a wide range of web sites and blogs that challenge the pseudo-science global warming activists employ to cause fear; to manipulate individuals; and to force governments into action. C3 Headlines attempts to identify and point to articles, papers, postings, videos, charts, and images that tell the scientific story about historical climate change; that tell about current climate conditions; and, tell about the foibles and failures of the global warming, the pseudo-science (empirical evidence not allowed science) and its stunningly hypocritical advocates.
We primarily accomplish the above by reviewing past published information (some information we post about is 5+ years old; if it's germane we'll post about no matter how old) and then creating a short headline that provides a glimpse of what information can be found by clicking on the headline's associated link(s). Sometimes our headlines allude to a topic that is deep into the associated article or PDF linked to, and may require the reader to wade into to figure out the headline's reference.
For my own curiosity, and to keep abreast of what's happening in the present, I frequently visit a number of blogs/sites. Click here if you'd like to see which ones.