Is global warming perfectly natural? - interesting article
Danbob
forest service," sites and thought you might find it interesting. It
certainly presents a different perspective from what we see on the
news:
http://westinstenv.org/sosf/2008/08/01/in-science-ignorance-is-not-bliss/#more-235
H
That's pretty much the conclusion I came to several years ago.
Too late, though, now that Al Gore has warped everyone's minds on the
subject.
What always amazed me is that everyone just assumes that global warming
is "bad." Not in Chicago.
A more concrete concern seems to be this - the Gulf Stream occasionally
reverses. Think about what that would do to the east coast of the US, &
most of Europe.
--
Harmon is "at mac dot com"
Danbob
> Danbob <caltex1...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > Ran across this article on global warming on one of my, "stop the forest
> > service," sites and thought you might find it interesting. It certainly
> > presents a different perspective from what we see on the news:
>
> > more-235
>
> That's pretty much the conclusion I came to several years ago.
>
> Too late, though, now that Al Gore has warped everyone's minds on the
> subject.
>
> What always amazed me is that everyone just assumes that global warming
> is "bad." Not in Chicago.
>
> A more concrete concern seems to be this - the Gulf Stream occasionally
> reverses. Think about what that would do to the east coast of the US, &
> most of Europe.
>
> --
> Harmon is "at mac dot com"
Oh, great - now I need to worry about the Gulf Stream, too.
And none of this is being presented on the news. Well, I guess it
would be difficult for the talking heads to get it across. We're
warming up, but we might be heading into a mini ice age. And that's
all perfectly natural.
Huh?
Much easier to discuss Hillary's body language.
Gene
Danbob,
There is no doubt that the earth has warmed and cooled in cycles over
the centuries. If it is warming now naturally AND warming because of
man, then we can do something about it. Those 400 "scientists" are a
bit of a red herring. Go back and look at their specialties - they
have no more concrete knowledge of climate change than any 10th
grader. In addition, many of them are not Ph.Ds, in fact some don't
even have a BS yet. Somehow being a science major and being a
scientist shouldn't be the same thing. That would be like saying an
ROTC cadet is an officer.
Gene
Danbob
Hey Gene,
Well, I certainly don't have the expertise to argue you it one way or
another. I didn't even get a chemistry set when I was a kid, damnit.
I have become very suspicious of, "known scientific facts," over the
last few weeks as a result of this fire situation. The,
"environmentalists," who came up with the let-it-burn policy
extrapolated from a heavy fuel load in the forests to the conclusion
that we caused it by fighting fires and onward to the conclusion that
the way to cure it is to burn the forests in order to save them.
They seem to forget their own history. The forest service was formed
in 1910 because there had been a series of catastrophic wild fires in
the west. So . . . what caused those?
H
> I have become very suspicious of, "known scientific facts," over the
> last few weeks as a result of this fire situation.
Welcome to the club. With me, it was global cooling & the Malthusian
predictions by the Club of Rome.
Danbob
Don't get me wrong - I like Al Gore very much - but this article did
sort of tickle me:
H
> Don't get me wrong - I like Al Gore very much - but this article did
> sort of tickle me:
>
>
>http://windfarms.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/al-gore-global-warming-respon
sible-for-disappearing-sunspots/
The reasoning is peccable. Or at least it would be if that word meant
what it should mean. Kind of interesting how linquistic drift has
slightly altered the meaning of impeccable so that it continues to have
a useful meaning, but not peccable.