Greetings from Ice covered New England. We just had a whopper of a ice storm here in central New England. What a mess. Nobody has power, and its going down to 15 tonight, and not expected to be above 20 for the next few days.
Thinking of, and researching the weather archives of the last two years in Michigan, I cannot in anyway conclude there is evidence of "global warming". In fact here in Michigan we have been experiencing...summers with mean temperature LOSS of over 11 degrees f, typical summers here have an average of 14, 90 degree plus days, in the last two years we've averaged 8!?...in the last decade, winter usually rears it's ugly head with sustained sub freezing temps and snow AFTER New Years, the last two years we've had a white Thanksgiving and snow in May!? Now I know the supposed effects of global warming are not uniform planet wide but this is what makes the global warming "theory" a hard sell!
re: global warming Two very important results of global warming: 1. hotter hots, colder colds, less time in between 2. weather patterns all over the globe change
As the temperature over all changes, stuff moves around more. That's the big picture of it.
The new rationalizing of Global Warming/Climate change.
This is interesting: change was the expected norm for climate, lo these last few millenia. The regions on earth have not seen more than 300 years of even modest consistency in order to compare this period of change to a norm.
Short lived species, with limited awareness, and very short memories, will declare that they are not changing anything. Yet empirical evidence is not subjective.
Man can, and is changing the planet. It is too short a time, and too complex for us to understand what percentage of the change is due to our influence, but keep in mind that PCB's are now present in every life form on earth, from pole to pole. Small error, resulting in a big effect.
Just one example among many, is building large dams changes the orbital period of the planet. It is measured, and no one disputes the data, but when the effect is due to personal activity, then data is in dispute.
Good points, Pods
I specifically mentioned Global warming as a hoax. (There is much scientific bologna with regards to PCB's, as well. Good science mixed with bad conclusions...what is the layman to do?)
That the climate changes: fact.
That man has caused it: not a fact
That the result of climate change are bad and should be avoided: not factual
That the only way to gain federal and private funding for science is to create a crisis: Still a universal fact
I know a few disenchanted scientists and one in particular who left academia completely over the global warming issue.
I do disagree that man is "changing" the planet. I would say man affects and effects the planet. Change can imply a permanence whereas affects and effects imply a temporarity to them. The language around the science of lobal warming is often not scientific. (Nor accurate, for that matter.) I am not suggesting this applies to you, Pods.
"scientists say..." Which scientists? Certainly not ocean scientists. In Feb 2008 levels of arctic ice back to normal limits. NASA indicated in a press release in October 2007 that the main component of change was wind driven flow patterns, not air temperature changes.
Comments (20)
To post a comment, you need to login or signup.