2.02.2007

Global Warming In The News Again

First, a democratic congress that refuses to will a victory for the U.S. in Iraq, and now - it had to happen, man-made climate change hysteria. In the IndyStar, from AP in Paris...
However, the panel also said its best estimate was for temperature rises of 3.2-7.1 degrees Fahrenheit. In 2001, all the panel gave was a range of 2.5-10.4 degrees Fahrenheit.
On sea levels, the report projects rises of 7-23 inches
Some nerve, calling THAT kind of cushion "science!" Isn't that like saying tomorrow's temperature will be somewher between -20 and +70 degrees?
by the end of the century. An additional 3.9-7.8 inches are possible if recent, surprising melting of polar ice sheets continues.
Did you know that England, long ago, used to grow wine grapes just like France? That was way back when England was much warmer than it is now. Yup. The Vikings of Norway used to sail their long ships to Iceland and Greenland, and even to the Americas...back when it was warmer.
"It's very conservative. Scientists by their nature are skeptics."
Especially when threatened with de-certification for holding beliefs considered heretical to orthodox "science."
While critics call the panel "overly alarmist, it is by nature relatively cautious because it relies on hundreds of scientists, including skeptics.
Why do they keep saying that? So anyway, The Norse settlers in Iceland had to abandon the homes (or they stayed and starved to death) because their growing seasons got shorter and the winters became longer and colder. French wine making moved south to the Mediterranean while the British grew hops and other short season grains, and made ale and beer (which explains why we Americans drink more beer than wine). Don't let me interrupt the global panic!
Authors of the report called it conservative: It used only peer-reviewed published science and was edited by representatives of 113 governments who had to agree to every word.

I live in Indianapolis (GO COLTS!!) which at one time was under a mile or two of ice. It's probable that the planet has warmed some since. That and the fact that no one ever guaranteed us a right to a stable climate draws me to agree somewhat with the concept of global warming. Still, there's something troubling to me about the way man's interference is being "marketed" - as the cause - to us. You can tell when the voice at the other end of the phone line is informing you of, say, a prescription that is ready for pickup - and when they are trying to sell a new medicine to you that you've never needed before. Professor Gray saysgive it time.
"They've been brainwashing us for 20 years," Gray says. "Starting with the nuclear winter and now with the global warming. This scare will also run its course. In 15-20 years, we'll look back and see what a hoax this was."
Gray directs me to a 1975 Newsweek article that whipped up a different fear: a coming ice age.
"Climatologists," reads the piece, "are pessimistic that political leaders will take any positive action to compensate for the climatic change. ... The longer the planners delay, the more difficult will they find it to cope with climatic change once the results become grim reality."
Thank God they did nothing. Imagine how warm we'd be?

No comments: