Climate change, global warming, whatever you want to call it is still a bunch of bull and I'm about sick and tired of hearing about it. Polar bears, ice caps, rising ocean levels, and the shut down of the global warm water currents are all supposed issues, again nothing but bull. So, there is no way that myself or anyone posting comments on this blog will ever be sure of the data but I think we can all agree that warming periods as well as cooling periods have happened before and will happen again.
In our recent history on this planet, we've been able to piece together some data about these periods of warming and cooling. Interestingly, it would seem that through all of these recent cooling and warming periods man...as well as the polar bears...have managed to survive, go figure. Does global warming occur, yes. Are we the cause, in my opinion (based on the data I've read), NO. Of course, should we be better stewards of our planet, sure...who would argue that? Should we all lose our minds and create an absolute panic about us destroying the planet, NO. This panic is creating an economy based on fear but that's another subject for another post.
For your reading pleasure... http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2007/10/03/nh-sea-ice-loss-its-the-wind-says-nasa/ or http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/06/080626-arctic-volcano.html or http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/05/27/cold-irony-arctic-sea-ice-traps-climate-tour-icebreaker/
I'm not saying NASA is correct or National Geographic but it does make you think. Where did all the data come from, who interprets the data, and finally who twists it to make it fit their agenda? Is this current warming trend caused by us or is there a natural explanation? It's good to note that neither the NASA report nor the National Geographic report is willing to make the connection to global warming. This is both good and bad. It seems to me that neither are willing to go out on a limb to change the current status quo...that's bad. The good is they are sticking with just the science of what they find and don't seem to want to pollute it with political agendas.
So, for those of you worried about the sea ice in the Arctic or the polar bears, STOP. The bears will find a way to survive as they have done for thousands of years. The sea ice will regain it's former breadth as it has done since before we were around. To tell you the truth, after this last winter, I welcome a little warming trend.
Edit: I was just looking at our local weather this evening to see if I will be able to ride my motorcycle tomorrow and noticed a link to an editorial. This particular editorial/blog was written by our local news weather intern Joe Hansel. It deals with the question of global warming...http://kstp.com/article/stories/S499627.shtml?cat=3 There are many studies out there concerning global warming and if you use a little common sense it becomes very clear that we (humans) have a neglible effect on global climate.
Let's take care of this planet but let's be responsible about how we do it.
Minneapolis, Don't Forget to Miss Me
4 years ago
Posts
7 comments:
You say this is all bull, it’s not. It’s science! About 5 decades of it to be sure. You have to admit, that on both sides of the issue there are people twisting the information to fit their agenda. Whose agenda is based solely on making a buck? I know, I know, you’re “carbon offset trading” bells are going off, but can you really compare any profits reaped by those manning the carbon offset trading market, with that of Oil industry? Really?
Ok.. I read your blog and I commend you for summarizing your opinion nicely. Although, using some intern at channel 5 news doesn't exactly bolster your argument. You've side tracked me into talking about the Global Warming issue, this is fine, I need and enjoy the debate. However, this is not what I was originally complaining about. I realize that you label yourself as an independent and that because you don't side with a particular political party that somehow you believe you're the free thinker, and that you're the open minded one. You're not. There's the science and there is the lies. I realize that you might be saying, you're more of a skeptic, and I believe that a healthy bit of skeptism will get you farther than blind faith, but you are willfully denying the rather obvious truth. You are repeating the lies of the world’s largest, most powerful corporations in the world!
The people that you share your view with are those that create the lies, and those that have heard the lie enough and believe it to be true. Those that create the lies typically are corporate funded politicians or organizations. For example, in the movie you introduced me to, "The Global Warming Swindle", was wrought with scientists that belonged to organizations funded directly by ExxonMobil. Do you think this might color their opinion? All your information has “Big Oils” fingerprints on it.
You say this is all bull, it’s not. It’s science! About 5 decades of it to be sure. 5 decades of science is good but that's really about climate change right? I mean, in the 70's it was global cooling that we were worried about. Recently it's global warming and now it's climate change. If you look at just what we call it, you see a trend...too cold, too hot, well we were wrong both of those times so we'll call it climate change. It's like religion...they tried shoving it into science class as is, then they tried intelligent design, who know's what they'll try next but I can almost guarantee it will be less specific to appeal to more people.
You have to admit, that on both sides of the issue there are people twisting the information to fit their agenda. Whose agenda is based solely on making a buck? I know, I know, you’re “carbon offset trading” bells are going off, but can you really compare any profits reaped by those manning the carbon offset trading market, with that of Oil industry? Really? Keep in mind that this blog is my opinion based on personal experience. In my 36 years, I have been through really cold and really hot. I've also been through everything in between. I've even noticed trends (albeit small trends but noticeable anyway). Ultimately though, I base my opinions on my own experience and if the Oil Industry happens to agree with me, so be it. Just because I'm from Alaska doesn't mean I agree with "Big Oil", in fact it's quite the opposite. Being from Alaska gives me a unique perspective on oil companies. Alaska's economy is based, largely, on oil and so I believe Alaska has an interest in keeping the oil wells going. I believe in opening up and drilling in ANWR. I don't believe in giving oil comapanies and breaks though. I don't think they should be able to get away with shoddy maintenance or short sighted policies that are a direct cause of recent oil spills. To suggest that I am motivated by oil is not the whole story. Oil is not the problem, we're always going to need oil...if not for fuel then for other products or lubrication of machinery or a billion other things. Isn't it odd though that shortly after spreading the word about global warming people were making millions off "air" (carbon offsets). It's almost as if they planned it.
Although, using some intern at channel 5 news doesn't exactly bolster your argument What exactly does it do then? The science is simple and makes sense. Why does it have to be complicated to be true? Climate science is far from simple but if you reduce the science to just basic building blocks and use current and historical data to show how those basic blocks interact to cause "x" then you start to see why change is natural. Volcanoes, wind, ocean, sun, ice...these are basic blocks. I guess what I'm trying to say is that the simpler the science the more believable. I'm not a free thinker, no one is, unless you consider the mentally insane. I am open minded and have considered both sides and have made my choice.
The people that you share your view with are those that create the lies, and those that have heard the lie enough and believe it to be true. Those that create the lies typically are corporate funded politicians or organizations. For example, in the movie you introduced me to, "The Global Warming Swindle", was wrought with scientists that belonged to organizations funded directly by ExxonMobil. Do you think this might color their opinion? All your information has “Big Oils” fingerprints on it. Ah, the "follow the money" argument. To be fair, both sides can be shown to be funded by questionable sources. I personally could care less if oil companies agree with me or not, my opinion would remain the same.
Ok- Global cooling. We had this discussion and I couldn't really counter that until I found this guy who's made it his hobby collecting information about the whole global cooling concern in the '70's.
http://www.wmconnolley.org.uk/sci/iceage/
Basically, they predicted global cooling, but.. and here's the difference. They took ACTION. A little something called the Clean Air Act. We cleaned the soot out of the air. You can trace back the date it was passed in the layers of Antarctic ice cores.
You speak as if there has been this recent 'shift' in scientists opion. No. There has only been a steady growing understanding. They were talking about Global Warming in the '70's too.
You simply cannot compare carbon trading to the Oil industry. First, there are non-profit carbon offset trading companies. When was the last time you heard of a non-profit oil company? Yes there are some who profit from it, but can you possibly compare their profits to that of a single oil company? It would be pocket change compared to the windfall profits oil companies make in a single year.
Global warming IS complicated, you can't simply point to one thing and say "THAT's GLOBAL Warming!" THAT is why using some news intern doesn't help your argument. Because at the end of the day, every major scientific institution dealing with climate, ocean, and atmosphere agrees that the climate is warming rapidly and the primary cause is human CO2 emissions. Your intern friend is simply adding to the useless pile of largely disproven and unverified evidence to the contrary argument.
I defy you to show me a more questionable source of funding than oil companies.
Saying that the Oil companies happen to agree with you is silly. You my friend are in denial. We're not talking about religion here... were talking about a mountain of credible evidence in-hand that point towards manmade warming and the rather lack thereof for your side of the argument.
Thank you for letting me post my raging liberal mind. I'm off to go hug a tree.
...and the Global Cooling concern was debunked anyway.
http://www.usatoday.com/weather/climate/globalwarming/2008-02-20-global-cooling_N.htm
From the article:
The '70s was an unusually cold decade. Newsweek, Time, The New York Times and National Geographic published articles at the time speculating on the causes of the unusual cold and about the possibility of a new ice age.
But Thomas Peterson of the National Climatic Data Center surveyed dozens of peer-reviewed scientific articles from 1965 to 1979 and found that only seven supported global cooling, while 44 predicted warming. Peterson says 20 others were neutral in their assessments of climate trends.
The study reports, "There was no scientific consensus in the 1970s that the Earth was headed into an imminent ice age.
"A review of the literature suggests that, to the contrary, greenhouse warming even then dominated scientists' thinking about the most important forces shaping Earth's climate on human time scales."
So I don't have time to re-write, quote, or modify this article in any way so when you have time feel free to read it. Lots of good info, and addresses many, if not all, of your concerns...
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/
As an aside, I think the ARTICLE has merit and doesn't seem to throw any punches though it's obviously trying to debunk global warming as man-made.
I don't, however, agree with or hold the same views as the owner of the website. Do not attack the owner in an effort to discredit the article.
You guys are giving me a headache. I generally believe in GW. But now that you mention it, it is kind of cool right now. Hold on, I think the window's open. Dammit woman, whut did I tell you about leaving the goddamn window open! jesus christ!
Oh wait, it's nighttime, that's why it's so cold. Ha! That's what happens when you play Halo too long, you forgit what time it is. At least i put on my pants today. You shulda seen the looks on those mormon dudes that knocked on my door the other day. I told 'em god made me pantless but they looked all skeeved out. I offered them a beer but they must not like coors.
Post a Comment