Antarctic sea ice set another record this past week, with the most amount of ice ever recorded on day 256 of the calendar year (September 12 of this leap year). linkI'm convinced that we don't know enough about how climate really works to make definitive statements about global warming. I'm beginning to think that the best we can do is make observations and comparisons, but drawing too much in the way of conclusions is beyond our capabilities at present. The science just isn't mature enough yet, and we have a long way to go.
Wednesday, September 19, 2012
Heard Anything About Global Warming Lately?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
The science just isn't mature enough yet, and we have a long way to go.
Indeed and that's a song I've been singing for some time which, at least to me, brings up the question of why lefties are so anxious to push policy based on a field of study that's nowhere near ready to help guide policy.
Allen, I think we *both* know the answer to that one. The lefties do, too.
I am convinced you have far too scientific of a mind to let political ideology fog your ability to acknowledge the climate is changing and a preponderance of evidence points to a significant role played by man's industrial activity
Wow, did you follow the link and the chart to the actual website at UIUC. Strangely, the scientists that post the chart had an entirely different conclusion than a writer at Forbes.
But we should probably take the word of the finance guy.
How do you ignore this?
http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
$$$??
Mazenko, the fact that you wrote three consecutive angry-sounding comments tells me you're more than a little, uh, "emotionally involved" in the topic.
But we should probably take the word of the finance guy.
In this case, yeah. After all, the NSIDC is silent on the subject of conditions in the Antarctic which sort of leaves the field open don't you think?
Darren, I don't know what your hypothesis is but mine's that lefties are emotionally-stunted, that they're operating with the emotional outlook of over-indulged children.
They want what they want and they want it now.
They expect others to give them what they want and they don't want to hear any reasons why they can't have it.
They're prone to throwing temper tantrums, the "Occupy" fad springs to mind and have no time to consider consequences which is just as well since they accept no responsibility for consequences. The collapse of the housing bubble and the disaster of it's predecessor, project housing are two examples.
They're deceitful, sulk when frustrated and once it becomes clear that they're not going to get what they want cast it aside. The unilateral nuclear disarmament movement and the homelessness crisis spring to mind as examples.
There's more. Lot's more by why belabor the point? What I really need is a way to falsify my hypothesis.
Anger no. But certainly incredulity. I do reassert that I'm convinced you are a more scientific and rational person than your climate change denials would imply. That would seem to be a more emotional that rational response.
My daughters world geography was just preparing to show "An Inconvenient Truth" to the class. Unfortunately he lost it so they watched "The Day After Tomorrow" instead. I feel so much better now...
When my son had the same class a few years ago, different teacher and same movie, another student asked is she could bring in a movie that had a different take on the subject. She is still my hero. She also objected to a Katy Perry's "California Girl" video to only to ask "what people in other countries would think of Americans because of the video?"
Mmazenko, your statement "the climate is changing" presupposes the idea that climate is static, which it is not. The world's climate is dynamic, and has been changing for years/centuries/millenia, colder and hotter, drier and wetter. It is a red herring to conflate Climate change "deniers" (using the derogatory leftie term) who deny that ANY climate change is happening with those who find insufficient evidence that this change is happening through global human activity.
Your projection of "emotional, not rational" easily applies to many in the pro-global warming/climate change camp, as well. If you were truly basing your statments on rational arguments, you should be easily able to see this for yourself.
Post a Comment