Some common sense about the "global warming" hysteria, coming from a layman armed only with common sense and empirical history:
(1) Man-made-global-warming (MMGW) is dubious. Overwhelming consensus of scientists? Oh puh-leeze. Some of us remember when the overwhelming consensus was a "new ice age". Some of us remember when we were told how polyunsaturated oils were GOOD for us (now margarine is recognized as being far worse than REAL butter). Some of us also remember when there was an overwhelming consensus that there would be a massive heterosexual AIDS epidemic (It's been 25 years now and I'm still waiting for it).
(2) Much of what is called "science" today is speculation and conjecture at best, agenda-driven alarmism at worst. Empirical history is a far better predictor than anyone's theorizing.
(3) Even if MMGW is in fact occurring, it will take CENTURIES to unfold at the very fastest. The ice ages took eons to unfold with or without us, and yes we will adapt. Ocean levels rising? Dig canals to flood useless desert depressions around the world and divert some major rivers.
(4) Frankly, MMGW might be a downright boon, with plant growth stimulated, by warmer and moister air and more carbon dioxide used by plants for photosynthesis. I'd enjoy a return to the mideval climate optimum, when Greenland had forests and Vikings grew grapes in the vicinity of Oslo! Think of it--the timberline moving higher and further north and the deserts blooming! But above all:
(5) Muslim fanatics getting and using A-bombs, or even lots of chemical munitions, are a far greater threat to the environment and humanity than the sum total of all of our vehicular activities.
The Business and Media Institute have a great report documenting that for the last 100 years, the media has gone from claiming a new ice age was coming, to claiming global warming was coming:
--Global Cooling: 1895-1932
--Global Warming: 1929-1969
--Global Cooling--AGAIN: 1954-1976
--Global Warming--AGAIN: 1981 to now
(1) Man-made-global-warming (MMGW) is dubious. Overwhelming consensus of scientists? Oh puh-leeze. Some of us remember when the overwhelming consensus was a "new ice age". Some of us remember when we were told how polyunsaturated oils were GOOD for us (now margarine is recognized as being far worse than REAL butter). Some of us also remember when there was an overwhelming consensus that there would be a massive heterosexual AIDS epidemic (It's been 25 years now and I'm still waiting for it).
(2) Much of what is called "science" today is speculation and conjecture at best, agenda-driven alarmism at worst. Empirical history is a far better predictor than anyone's theorizing.
(3) Even if MMGW is in fact occurring, it will take CENTURIES to unfold at the very fastest. The ice ages took eons to unfold with or without us, and yes we will adapt. Ocean levels rising? Dig canals to flood useless desert depressions around the world and divert some major rivers.
(4) Frankly, MMGW might be a downright boon, with plant growth stimulated, by warmer and moister air and more carbon dioxide used by plants for photosynthesis. I'd enjoy a return to the mideval climate optimum, when Greenland had forests and Vikings grew grapes in the vicinity of Oslo! Think of it--the timberline moving higher and further north and the deserts blooming! But above all:
(5) Muslim fanatics getting and using A-bombs, or even lots of chemical munitions, are a far greater threat to the environment and humanity than the sum total of all of our vehicular activities.
The Business and Media Institute have a great report documenting that for the last 100 years, the media has gone from claiming a new ice age was coming, to claiming global warming was coming:
--Global Cooling: 1895-1932
--Global Warming: 1929-1969
--Global Cooling--AGAIN: 1954-1976
--Global Warming--AGAIN: 1981 to now
British amateur meteorologist G. S. Callendar made a bold claim....that many would recognize now. He argued that man was responsible for heating up the planet with carbon dioxide emissions – in 1938.
It wasn’t a common notion at the time, but he published an article in the Quarterly Journal of the Royal Meteorological Society on the subject. “In the following paper I hope to show that such influence is not only possible, but is actually occurring at the present time,” Callendar wrote. He went on the lecture circuit describing carbon-dioxide-induced global warming.
But Callendar didn’t conclude his article with an apocalyptic forecast, as happens in today’s global warming stories. Instead he said the change “is likely to prove beneficial to mankind in several ways, besides the provision of heat and power.” Furthermore, it would allow for greater agriculture production and hold off the return of glaciers “indefinitely.”
No comments:
Post a Comment