If you have been reading from the beginning, then you know that “Global Warming” and its supporters are one on my pet peeves. So when I saw this article on climate change in Australia, I had to look. Sure enough, they mentioned greenhouse effect and “Global Warming” in the first sentence.
This is a subject that draws idiots like honey draws flies. Look at the fourth paragraph, a quote by the senior climatologist at the country’s Bureau of Meteorology. I have a lot of gall, but I don’t have as much as that man. Did he take a poll of every scientist in the world? The how the hell does he know what most scientist say on the subject.
I have two other issues with that statement.
The first: have you ever seen a room full of scientists agree on anything?
The second: Who cares what most scientists agree with? What do most Climatologists and meteorologists say? Who cares what the zoologists and botanists and nuclear physicists think? I hold Romulus Crowe’s opinions on parapsychology in high regard, but his thoughts on “Global Warming” are no more important than mine (even if he happens to agree with me) because his knowledge lies in other areas.
I will have to give Rob Taylor credit though, since he did report all of the info, like the fact that the average temperature is only 1 degree (Fahrenheit) higher that the historical average, and was only the eleventh warmest year since 1910, and the southeast of the country had a cooler year in 2006 (Average) than 2005.
So, once again, “Global Warming” though much touted either has no empirical proof, or is so surrounded by idiots that we just can’t see the truth (and with that thought, even I can admit the possibility of being wrong).
Incidentally, you can share your idiot stories (news or otherwise), by sending an email to victorallenwinters @ yahoo.com just remove the spaces.
Until next time,
I’ll be in my trailer.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Me be needing a change of pace so Me decided to visit some friends of friends. Me likes your take on things, especially asking for empirical evidence instead of opinion.
Did you enjoy Life of Pi?
Me thought it was wonderful.
Did you know that Kafka means crow?
Me bet you did.
Do you wanna buy some nekkid pics of Brittany Spears with a goat?
Me thought not
I like the way you write, but if you are looking for evidence of global warming you might want to check out the recent discoveries of the increasing melt rate of the northern polar ice cap as well as the decrease in ice mass in the south. We are approaching the event horizon and sitting in your trailer will not do anything to change the attitude of ignorant buisness conglomerates who continually pump out co2 gasses without thought that it might affect the environment. You seem intelligent I would think an intelligent person would check out all the facts before presenting his opinions as the be all and end all of scientific enquiry.
Scary Monster - Thank you. Please pop in any time. Yes, I loved, the life of Pi, though I have the incredible compulsion to contact the author to verify whether or not it is fiction. I have the feeling that Mr. Martel would either look at me and ask what I thought, or worse, tell me the truth.
anonymous - I shouldn't even respond to this, since you can't even be bothered to add a name to your post, but I will.
1. Read Kicking the Sacred Cow by James P Hogan.
2. Melting Ice does not prove global warming; it proves that ice melts when exposed to temperatures above freezing.
3. The greenhouse effect is mostly caused by water vapor.
4. Unless you have unlimited time (or say, your job revolves around it), you cannot read all of the information available on "Global Warming" and separating the fact from the propaganda is rather difficult, as I have been pointing out. (Especially, like I said, when it is not the person’s area of expertise)
5. And this is probably the most important: I did not say that my opinion was the be all end all, in fact, I implied that it wasn't worth much.
6. Besides, this blog isn't about global warming, it is about stupidity, and (with apologies to the Hindus for my sarcastic use of the word) the pundits surrounding "Global Warming" are the best of the bunch.
"Unless you have unlimited time (or say, your job revolves around it), you cannot read all of the information available on "Global Warming" and separating the fact from the propaganda is rather difficult, as I have been pointing out."
That seems the crux of it, at least in my case. I have no idea whether it's so or not, and so, all things being equal, one tends to be swayed by sheer volume of comments, and sheer volume favors the GW people.
Fortunately, nothing much is riding on what I think. Also (you know I'm a religious character) Rev 11:18 makes reference to how God will "bring to ruin those ruining the earth."
Fifty years ago such a capability...ruining the earth....seemed improbable, save for nuclear weapons. Today there are countless ways that come to mind in which people might do it.
That's not to say all the threats are valid, but fifty years ago you could only come up with one.
My sister Misty has always said Mother Earth will kill us before she allows us to kill her. I think there's a certain amount of wisdom in that.
Tom - As a "religious character" you should realize that sheer volume does not make something right (see Romans 3:23 for the most telling example).
SW - On some levels I agree completely.
due to the lack of intelligence you claim on the matter of global warming then you probably should not be calling people who support it stupid since you lack the information as a scientific authority to decide whether it is right or wrong. what qualifications do you have? degree diploma etc. finally if water vapor causes the greenhouse effect and the ice is melting because of the green house effect where is the increased water vapor coming from? perhaps increased evapotranspiration rates which implies increased temperature.
Post a Comment