Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: george76
One can allow for a Fox commentator being parti pris, but for him to cite the recent evidence of Gulf Stream slowing, and the probable consequent cooling of the West European climate, as a counter to global warming theory is a wee bit naughty and/or lazy. He should have known (probably does) that this effect has been predicted for a couple of decades by global warming theorists as a result of arctic ice melting. Lazy rhetoric on the sceptical side of the argument is just as tiresome, I find, as it is on the other side.
11 posted on 12/08/2005 1:26:26 AM PST by Winniesboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Winniesboy

Agreed, this is exceptionally shoddy journalism.

This part is also inaccurate:

"In September, Blair announced that he had given up on climate change treaties"

Blair did not announce at all that he had 'given up' on climate change treaties, indeed that speech was immediately followed by the dispatch of his chief scientific advisor to Australia to try to encourage them to sign up to Kyoto and to express the hope that the US would do likewise.


12 posted on 12/08/2005 2:39:17 AM PST by Canard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Winniesboy

A while back I was watching a TV "Special" about "The Real Noah". Not quite the guy I read about in the Bible of course. But there was an interesting statement: That "the climate at that time was much hotter than it is now." (That is a fairly accurate paraphasal -- it's been a few months since I watched the show, so I won't claim it's word for word.) I just wonder how that little tidbit fits in...

Also, I believe there have been more than one "Little Ice Ages" since the last major Ice Age. Were these little ones limited to Europe? Do we have a clue what triggered them? (It was Bush, right?) Could we even now be simply resuming a recovery from the last one? (I use the word "recovery" with some reservation -- it sort of implies a "normal" and I don't think you can really define "normal" for a global roller coaster observed over geologic time periods.)

Would someone please tell me why, based on the last few billion years, I should expect the climate to be stable? Just because it's convenient for me? Seems to me Mother Nature never takes long to get back to doing her best to scramble the best laid plans of man. (Or Dinosaurs.)

Sorry if any of these are dumb questions. Never have enough time to follow stuff any more...


20 posted on 12/08/2005 4:56:05 PM PST by Paul R. (June 8, 1966: Tornado removed most of our house, glad we had a basement!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson