Friday, January 26, 2007

Global Warming or Climate Change

This blog is fulfilling its mission as it is disturbing some, and provoking thought in others. The fact that scientific consensus is not science does not deter the adherents of so called global warming. That this is a topic near and dear to many is not surprising everyone needs a reason to get up in the morning, liberals more than most, so this "science" is as good as the next thing. Perhaps the homeless advocates would prefer a warmer environment for their clients but it just isn't going to happen.

In the United States the population lost its raison d'etre during the 1960's. During that time controls were loosened to the extent that the need for them was lost. Today on the Laura Ingraham program was a lost soul from that period. Still hating her country still hoping for a Marxist solution to her life. The top ten polluted spots on earth are in Russia, China, India, and the Czech Republic of which only Russia is a Kyoto signatory. Sign anything but give them nothing seems to be the motto of the former Soviet Union; don't be surprised if like AT&T they reclaim their satellites.

One reader commented that today's global warming cannot be compared to the end of the Ice Age. Why not? Is it possible that natural processes stop just because the uber-gauche prefer that this should be the case? Of course today's warming trend is a continuation of what occurred 18,000 years ago if it weren't we would be experiencing global cooling (which was predicted by climatologists during the 1980s). Without doubt humankind is having an impact on the trend there are more people and animals breathing than ever before.

It cannot be known until after the fact if the current accelerated warming trend will be bad or good. What is known is that consensus science is purely theoretical and not axiomatic

1 comment:

CentFla said...

not surprising but you missed my point in my prior post. I did not say that the Global Warming of the Ice Age era could not be compared to any warming that might occur now. I asked a question about the veracity of such an argument. Frankly for a person clearly against scientific research (you only use the word in quotes "science")That was a pretty dramatic climate change I think all would agree. If we changed by adding another 10 deg Cel. to the planets temp. our lives would also change dramatically.

I have never even seen the Gore movie and can't imagine anything more excruciating than listening to him talk for two hours. However, you make no argument but two - it is all "science" and therefore should be discounted until after the fact - and two - if it is happening we should just ride it out because it is not our fault and it won't be that bad anyway. Either of those arguments are very unthoughtful.