I’ve been quiet on the merits of global climate change for a while, but not because I changed my mind about the validity of that claim, nor about my belief that human activity plays a role in the warming trend. It seems to me that a global warming trend will significantly alter the geo-political reality and place enormous long term pressure on the ability of governments to effectively deal with the effects of resettlement, changing sea levels, and other global impacts. I have not bothered to engage or comment on the various nay-sayers that use cherry-picked data to “proof” their point, because, frankly, what does my opinion really account for or matter.
But it seems the Associated Press did take notice and wanted to get to the bottom of the global cooling trend claim. An AP Science Writer article on today’s MSNBC website details a “blind” analysis by independent statisticians and concludes that the data shows a continued global warming trend. Unfortunately, the article itself does fall in the same trap it accuses the nay-sayers of – in the end, the author cherry-picks scientists and data to make inflammatory predictions about near-term trends. In this case, the dim-witted author regurgitates a claim that next year’s El Nino will produce a record breaking 2010 so that “a cooling trend will never be talked about again.” He should have left well-enough alone!!!
3 comments:
Give Up Meat to Save the Planet, or so says Lord Stern of Brentford, I. G. Patel Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics.
Quoting Lord Stern: "Direct emissions of methane from cows and pigs is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Methane is 23 times more powerful than carbon dioxide as a global warming gas."
With the loss of Senator Kennedy our prime example of people thinking globally, but failing to act locally (wind mills), has done gone away, but we still face the question of if this is so serious, where are the serious solutions.
Regards — Cliff
I think there is overwhelming evidence that Serious Solutions are NOT a logical part of the political elites. Why would you expect serious solutions on climate change, when the evidence is overwhelming that a near-term problem like health care reform cannot be de-politicized? And there, one is only dealing with two political parties. How many political parties does it take to do something, anything, on climate change?
We talk about health care reform as a political issue, but I see it as a conceptual issue. What is being talked about? Insurance. What is the problem? Having a health care delivery system that meets the needs of the customer.
When folks start talking about getting health care to those in need, I will perk up my ears. Maybe it is the same way with climate change. We KNOW that the climate will change. It has in the past and it will in the future. People used to skate on the canals and now no longer do so. The elites need to talk in terms that convey the situation. And, talk in terms that can be accepted. The UN SecGen makes everyone think he is out to begger the Western nations while fixing the climate change problem. That is not helpful.
In the mean time I am going to bed, in hopes of being rested up and able to find a poker game tomorrow around lunch time.
Regards — Cliff
Post a Comment