Re: Warming - Cooling - Climate will change



Jo Schaper wrote:

JimLillie wrote:
Scotty wrote:
> On Tue, 3 Jun 2008 15:29:08 -0700 (PDT), Alastair
> <al@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> <big snip>
>
>> Will,
>>
> As a "denier", I can't let this pass. I don't know anybody who denies
that the
> globe is warming (or even Mars, for that matter). It has been warming
for the
> last 400 years since the last mini ice-age.
>
> What I, and other deniers deny is the Al Gore thesis that it is
CAUSED by CO2
> and that reducing CO2 will reverse the warming.
>
> The warming started 400 years ago, long before the start of the
Industrial
> Revolution. It is debatable that we might have reached a turning
point. The
> warmest year in the last century was 1934, the second warmest was
1998 and it
> has been cooling ever since. The temps for 2007 puts us back to temps
that last
> occurred in the '80s.
>> Cheers, Alastair.

Recently I handled a clipping from Time(?) about 1980. For the previous
3 - 4 decades global temperatures had been creeping down. Glaciers were
advancing, and the Arctic ice cap was growing each year. Scientists are
concerned we may be entering a new ice age.

Historically England has been warm enough to grow grapes for wine. Now?
Historically England has been cold enough the Thames would freeze for
Ice Fairs. Now?
Canadian tundra has tree stumps, the tree line used to be farther North.

I do NOT deny Al Gore is a politician.

Jim Lillie -- engineer

No, but I do deny he is a scientist. Jimmy Carter is more of an
scientist than he is (if we wanna pick on politicians)and look where it
got him. Many people forget that Herbert Hoover was some sort of an
engineer, and obviously the wrong man in the wrong place at the wrong
time. I'm not sure scientists should be in the public arena as advocates
and not as experts on their field. Even Einstein went a little wacky
when he got mixed up in commenting on things outside of physics and it's
applications.

Seriously, if people want to take a look at GW, get a copy of this
month's Skeptic Magazine. They have an article on the error bars of many
of the computer models which are being presented to the general public
as fact, and a couple of other articles covering a spectrum of
viewpoints. Wired Mag also has an interesting tack that tech is going to
save us-- well, that's one take on things, but going blissfully pastoral
isn't gonna happen, either.

Climate changes...that's a given. That the current virus of 6.7 billion
people (many of whom have air conditioners and more than half live in
heat island cities) has no impact on weather and climate -- well, I
don't buy that. On the other hand, the GW crazies who claim people are
most of the problem, and the sun, sunspots, volcanoes, Milankovitch
cycles and weather patterns are incidental -- well, I don't buy that,
either.

I think most rational folks agree that we shouldn't foul this planet
unless we have an alternative, we should clean up our messes as much as
we can, and doing more with less is a good thing. I've about had it to
here with the true believers in global warming as preached by Gore, and
the mainstream media. We don't need to cry wolf== we need to work on
coming up with real solutions.

Still swimming in the middle of the river and enjoying the float down
the stream.

(Yeah, .. Bin it, ..or swim in it. If everybody did it, or had an
Attitude, there'd by no problem. )

But there's nothing wrong with crying wolf, about the things you see
wrong, surely, if it helps to raise people's awareness. It's the
silent majority you have to fear - those who turn a blind eye to
others whose self interest is served by *** and corruption, not the
vocal minority who want a better world. It has to begin
somewhere, ..and nowhere better than highlighting the problem. Even
if whateveritis is all wrong, if it helps to improve things then it
can only be to the good.

<Something about Hitler and Nazis and burning the Volk in gas ovens
in the interest of a better world in here>

.