The Two Sides to Global Warming

Reason Magazine Online ^ | 11/10/2004 | Ronald Bailey

[BwanaNdege]

Sorry, in my haste I omitted these links:

http://www.john-daly.com/
Still Waiting for the Greenhouse - A Lukewarm View of Global Warming

http://www.greeningearthsociety.org/index.html
CO2 and Climate

http://muller.lbl.gov/pages/IceAgeBook/history_of_climate.html
Brief introduction to the history of climate

http://muller.lbl.gov/papers/nature.html
Origin of the 100 kyr Glacial Cycle: Eccentricity or orbital inclination?

Take a look at these links, read the articles and THINK for yourself. Sit down with a calculator or spreadsheet and compare the magnitudes of Anthropogenic (human created) Greenhouse Gases vs natural causes.

For example, in the USA, bovine flatulance is a larger factor than SUV exhaust. World wide, termites are a huge source of greenhouse gases. Look at the Global Warming data covering more that the last 4 decades or the last century.

Get all the data, not just that which the MSM wants you to see. Think and reason. You're and adult, right.

[matchwood]

It isn't our fault, those dumb Red State people back 20,000 years ago started it all when they caused the last Ice Age meltdown.

Too bad our ancestors of 100,000 years ago discovered fire - this would still be a "cool" place to live.

[rmh47]

nature is cyclic, isn't it? (not for dems, because they aint natural.)

I disagree. Dems are most certainly natural. Parasites have always been with us. ;>)

[mlocher]

I disagree. Dems are most certainly natural. Parasites have always been with us. ;>)

ROTFLMAO!!!!!!!!

[Jaysun]

Jaysun, I do not agree with your reasoning here. Percentages of substances are arbitrary when you consider the impact of each substance. Would you be worried if 5% of that insignificant coffee was composed of Anthrax???

Stop your demagoguery for the love of God. Come on. Arsenic in coffee could at least be identified as being a problem or not. That's far more than we can say for that steaming pile called "global warming". What evidence do you have that the 5% is more significant that the rest of it? There isn't any such evidence.

Global warming is a costly "problem" that's been literally pulled out of thin air. It's complete and utter nonsense. I've looked into the matter a great deal, and spent some time with a professor at the University of Alabama, as well as some NASA chums. I'm telling you it's crazy. They've already started giving prolonged harangues in which they say that even there's still a lot of holes in the idea right now it's important enough to warrant billions, nay trillions, in "insurance". That's absurd.

Their motivation for continuing to sell this BS is two fold:

Money.

Throws one hell of a wrench in the wheels of that evil practice known as free enterprise.

That's the bottom line friend. Science isn't subject to a "vote" it's subject to facts. Global warming remains a theory as it is now. A theory on par with the one that claimed the moon was made of cheese, but a theory nonetheless.

.

[Jaysun]

I live in New England and am headed home soon to 4" of white global warming........

You should gather a bunch of aerosol cans and spray them into the heavens. That's what we're doing here in Alabama. Damned you cold weather!

[GreenFreeper]

Jaysun, I said i disagree with your logic not your take home message. You are correct in that arsenic or anthrax can be identified as a problem. The problem is global warming is much more complex issue involving literally billions upon billions of interactions.

The fact is we really do not understand how our actions affect the atmospheric environment, too many factors involved. However even a small shift in global temperature can have profound effects upon the agricultural economy, desertification for example happens pretty regularily in regions of heavy human exploitation.

And your correct in stating that global warming is just a theory. There aren't many facts in science as a whole and global warming is about as far from fact as any theory. However, it is also not a fact that anthropogenic astmospheric alteration have NO serious ramifications. I'm not saying we should go out and spend trillions of dollars on global warming research but we should be mindful of how we are impacting the earth. That 1/100,000,000,000 of a % of SOx or NOx can possibly have a disproportionally huge impact. We just don't know.

[Imperialist]

"shouldn't we still strive to be good stewards of the land?"(GreenFreeper)

Yes we should strive, when based on real science.

[beebuster2000]

thanks for the post

[Jaysun]

Jaysun, I said i disagree with your logic not your take home message.

Please accept my apology. I can get over zealous concerning this subject. I see the environmental movement as very detrimental for the most part. The Soviets recognized it as a useful "social change" tool. Incidentally, did you know that Momar Qaddafi wrote a book on the subject? This was, of course, prior to his recent spurt of rationality.

However, it is also not a fact that anthropogenic astmospheric alteration have NO serious ramifications. I'm not saying we should go out and spend trillions of dollars on global warming research but we should be mindful of how we are impacting the earth. That 1/100,000,000,000 of a % of SOx or NOx can possibly have a disproportionally huge impact. We just don't know.

Agreed. My problem is that your reasonable and responsible stance on the situation bares no resemblance to the stance taken by the great unwashed. There's a surprising number of people out there that would have loved for us - and still advocate that we do - submit ourselves to the Kyoto sham. These are the same people that seize the rights of private land owners for the sake of insects and rodents. These are also the same people that have evidently been given powers not afforded to most elected officials. Who touched each of their shoulders with the tip of a sword and granted them such authority? My stance on the matter is this: if I spend 20 million dollars preparing to mine iron ore in some remote location, and someone demands that I be stopped for the sake of 20 salmon, they should only be able to stop me by effectively purchasing those salmon. In this case it would come out to roughly 1 million dollars per fish. I bet they'd think twice then - but that doesn't stop them from subjecting others to the same type of deal. I've paid for salmon of my own and that's why I loathe the environmentalist.

Guess I'm chasing rabbits now. Sorry. I don't know what else to say, so Here's a catchy little hippie ditty that we'll all recognize.

[Jaysun]

Oops! Messed up the link. Try this. this

[BlessedBeGod]

COLD, HARD FACTS ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING

Perpetuating The Big Lie: Debunking the Catastrophic Global-warming Myth

THE GREAT GLOBAL WARMING HOAX

[Arizona Carolyn]

Well true or not I accidentally stumbled on a liberal site about "windpower" and they've decided if we concentrate on developing massive amounts of windmills for wind power we'll reverse global warming... because they will blow cold air towards the polls and help the artics. I'm not making this up.... not one of these brain surgeons posting there happened to mention a lot of the mills we already have are killing off a lot of birds on the migration path...

[standupfortruth]

You could spray 10,000 aerosol cans into the air and it would not effect the earth's atmosphere one iota. I am so tired of these supposed scientists with anti-capital political agendas spewing their junk science on the world.

[Jaysun]

You could spray 10,000 aerosol cans into the air and it would not effect the earth's atmosphere one iota. I am so tired of these supposed scientists with anti-capital political agendas spewing their junk science on the world.

My point and sentiments exactly. In fact, I'm sick of all of the baby killing, queer promoting, success punishing bastards out there. I loathe them.