.: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :.But if I were to say that, it'd simply be an example of how I was bought out by BigOil. Or Big Tobacco. Or Big Coal. Or some other environmentalist boogieman...Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.
The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.
Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears “bite the dust.” (LINK) In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement. (LINK)
Look - I've got no problem with global warming. As I've posted before, I've reviewed a good bit of the evidence and find the case made for anthropological climate modifications. And I think it's a damn good thing, or we'd be waist-deep in an ice age at this point.
But if you insist on putting the supposed environmental thermostat to ONE temperature and using the technological base of the entire planet to keeping it at that one particular setting come hell or high water or global economic collapse, you need to first tell me what that setting is, how we're supposed to get it there, and how we're going to keep it there despite fluctuations in solar output.
And while you're at it, you better have a GOOD cost-benefits analysis to persuade me it would be a bright friggin' idea to do it in the first place. Because I'm thinking that man-made climate change isn't a bug, that it's more of a feature.
J.
Comments (4)
Back in the 1970s, while in college, I worked for a landscaping outfit. Basically mowing lawns. The summer of 1979 in Texas was brutal. San Angelo was consistently hitting the 106 degree mark. Dallas hit 116 degrees. BTW, this was NORMAL! And, our nation's lab coated high priests were predicting a future ice age! Perhaps they should dust off Heisenberg's Principle of Uncertainty.
Posted by Tim | December 21, 2007 11:09 AM
Posted on December 21, 2007 11:09
Yeah, I remember that year. I was up near Abilene, TX, at Dyess AFB at the time. It was... toasty.
And it snowed there that winter.
I get the feeling that there's certain groups that MUST have something to be scared about, that they feel obligated to use to control others.
I can't say I appreciate it at all.
J.
Posted by JLawson | December 21, 2007 5:44 PM
Posted on December 21, 2007 17:44
"I get the feeling that there's certain groups that MUST have something to be scared about, that they feel obligated to use to control others."
Almost, Jerry. But it's more like "I get the feeling that there's certain people who make up stuff for advocacy groups to get scared about so THEY will do the dirty work of controlling the rest of us."
There's probably some further refinements possible here, but what the heck, it's almost Christmas.
(Have a merry one, y'all.)
Posted by delayna | December 22, 2007 10:02 AM
Posted on December 22, 2007 10:02
Merry Christmas to you, too!
J.
Posted by JLawson | December 24, 2007 8:01 AM
Posted on December 24, 2007 08:01