What do you recommend that my mom and I should see in your state?
***
Like candy to a little kid, like heroin to an addict, like a microphone to Ted Kennedy, Global Warming articles are irresistible to me. And today I have three.
Yesterday, Rusty Humphries, in his WorldNetDaily commentary, pointed out that global warming is going on in other parts of the Solar System.
Earth's scientists have determined that every globe, I mean, every planet, in the solar system is currently experiencing a warming trend – including Earth. I was surfing the Internet recently and came across two fascinating articles from Space.com. The first headline reads, ''New Storm on Jupiter Hints at Climate Change.''
The other article was written several years ago. The thrust of this scientific writing was Mars' ice caps have been observed to be shrinking.
We have discovered one of God's great creations, the Sun, is throwing off a little more energy these days and warming all the planets in our solar system. That's worthy of a global celebration, right?
And, with the information we now have, can we get rid of the phrase, ''global warming,'' and start using the more appropriate, ''solar warming''?
So if Jupiter and Mars are warming too, maybe the coming catastrophe isn't really our fault?
Second, Tom Harris in the June 12, 2006, Canada Free Press (HT: ShopFloor), debunked Al Gore's claims in his recent movie, "An Inconvenient Truth."
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field. (emphasis added)
Harris points out that, among that fraction of scientists who are in the climate field, most are studying the effects of climate change, not the causes. And many of those studying the "causes" are really working on computer models for predicting the future.
We should listen most to scientists who use real data to try to understand what nature is actually telling us about the causes and extent of global climate change. In this relatively small community, there is no consensus, despite what Gore and others would suggest.
Right. Let's not get hasty with a "cure."
Third, ShopFloor also had a link to a two-year-old Common Dreams article explaining how Global Warming will cause an Ice Age. I already posted on something similar, with ocean currents, but I still don't see any real answers. From Common Dreams:
While global warming is being officially ignored by the political arm of the Bush administration, and Al Gore's recent conference on the topic during one of the coldest days of recent years provided joke fodder for conservative talk show hosts, the citizens of Europe and the Pentagon are taking a new look at the greatest danger such climate change could produce for the northern hemisphere - a sudden shift into a new ice age. What they're finding is not at all comforting.
In quick summary, if enough cold, fresh water coming from the melting polar ice caps and the melting glaciers of Greenland flows into the northern Atlantic, it will shut down the Gulf Stream, which keeps Europe and northeastern North America warm. The worst-case scenario would be a full-blown return of the last ice age - in a period as short as 2 to 3 years from its onset - and the mid-case scenario would be a period like the "little ice age" of a few centuries ago that disrupted worldwide weather patterns leading to extremely harsh winters, droughts, worldwide desertification, crop failures, and wars around the world. (emphasis added)
OK. Look at the map at the top. Look at all the warm currents--most of the Pacific, most of the Atlantic. The cold currents are around Antarctica and up in the Arctic. Take a look at how the coming "freeze" would get here (the Great Conveyor Belt is cold, salty water that circulates below the surface currents from Greenland, down and around the southern tip of Africa, and into the Pacific--taking as much as a thousand years to get there):
If the Great Conveyor Belt, which includes the Gulf Stream, were to stop flowing today, the result would be sudden and dramatic. Winter would set in for the eastern half of North America and all of Europe and Siberia, and never go away. Within three years, those regions would become uninhabitable and nearly two billion humans would starve, freeze to death, or have to relocate. Civilization as we know it probably couldn't withstand the impact of such a crushing blow.
"Never go away"? It went away before, or we wouldn't get oppressive summers on the East Coast. Once upon a time, the last Ice Age cleared up (I think they just had a movie out about that).
But--and here's the thing they haven't answered so I can understand--if the earth is warming, won't the warm water in the Atlantic and Pacific get warmer? Isn't that why Greenland will melt and put all that melted ice in the North Atlantic?
And when warm water and cold water get together, don't they reach an equilibrium? Won't the water get tepid? And if we have tepid water, how will winter come to stay?
And if the warm and cold water don't get together (because the Conveyor Belt stopped), what will be keeping them apart? Won't there come a time, if it's always winter, that the cold water in the north will freeze again because it's always winter?
And do these leftists even care what happens outside of Western Europe and the American Northeast? They make relocation sound like a fate worse than starving or freezing to death. Aren't they worried about California's endless summer? Don't they care what happens to all the people in Asia, where there's no Greenland to melt and give them winter? If Global Warming is global, then how can only part of the globe freeze?
I don't get how the global warming alarmists can be so narrow, so preoccupied with their own little tiny piece of the world. Frankly, I think global warming will kill these guys sooner than the climate does. All their panic has to have elevated their blood pressure, which will lead to heart disease. I think they should be more alarmed about that.
No comments:
Post a Comment