Global Warming?

[N80]

George, I admire your taste in ginger ale, but I think you fall into the common trap of assuming that whatever problem comes up must be the fault of those other guys, and here those other guys would be the foolish liberals. It is not at all clear how the US nuclear energy program was essentially junked.

Well, I agree and disagree. I do not agree that there were significant other factors outside of environmentalist/anti-nuke pressure. I understand that it was a multifactorial issue, but the primary factors were clear. The fact that Three Mile Island became a rally cry, was pretty much an anti nuke creation.

I do agree that my post was purely one sided and I thought about that as I typed it but decided it was an overly involved rant already. But sure, you create a vacuum by disabling nuclear energy and you create market and power opportunities that will be filled. The petroleum industry in all this is as big a bug bear as any other faction or idealogy.

Was anyone clammoring for nuclear power?

Why yes, yes they were. Definitely. But between the media and the activists, what was already a potentially risky investment became untenable.

Since the Great Prevaricator made Liberal a dirty word in the 80's, Conservatives have had at least as much time to undo the damage if that was of interest to them.

The Great Communitcator had less to do with making 'liberal' a dirty word than the Great Do Nothing he replaced. But I agree, in the interveneing years, no political party, right or left, has done anything to make anything better. But sure, plenty of blame to go around. But I prefer to blame those with whom I disagree....don't you? And someone mentioned the president from Arkansas. Who else could appear at a gathering of anti-logging environmentalists in the morning and a gatthering of lumberjacks in the evening, promise them both that he was totally on their side....and have both groups go home happy! That man is a Jedi!

Follow the money is a phrase that comes to mind, and money knows no ideology.

I am in total agreement. And there is no better way to divorce idealogy from money than to make property ownership corporate. Corporations do not have souls. Don't get me started, this is an interest of mine that I have put considerable study into. Corporate irresponsibility is a real issue.

Is Science a Liberal field?

No. And I did not suggest that it was. I said that science was as prone to liberal ideaology as any other institution. It can be prone to any ideaology you choose. That is my point. Too many people assume that 'science' is somehow this great, neutral arbiter of truth. It isn't. In fact, its no closer to that than any other -ism or faith based religion.

While Universities have the reputation of being Liberal, the Sciences, Engineering, Medical and Agricultural faculties probably reflect about the same political balance as the general population.

Maybe. Maybe not. The medical sciences tend to be enormously liberal in some very specific and prominent subspecialties and organizations. No 'science' is immune. In the fields you cite, corporate influence trumps ideaology more than anything else. When DuPont or Phizer builds your university a mulit-gazzilion dollar chemistry building....which way do you think the research trends?

The next political cycle may help clarify who thinks what, since the apparent front runner on the Republican side doesn't seem to hold Al Gore in contempt.

We've been asked to keep politics out of this but I'll hazard to suggest a bipartisan aphorism and state unequivocally that political cycles never clarify anything.

Great discussion Chuck.

 

[Chuck52]

Darn. I just PMed George and told him I wouldn't be posting to this thread any more because though the discussion was going OK, it was clear we could easily get heated up. However, I figured my latest take on Global Warming might be of inteest to the group.

I was writing my last post at 7:45 last evening when my phone rang. My wife was on the line wondering why I wasn't there to pick her up at 7:30. By reflex, I said "Oh! I forgot all about you!" No matter the cause. No matter the consequences, Global Warming is a trivial problem by comparison. I did make a bit of headway by whinning that I really meant I had forgotten the time, but for a good while there I figure the global temperature dropped several degrees.

Peace and farewell to this thread.

Chuck

 

[_RaT_]

I too have enjoyed the comments from everyone in particular George and Chuck. George, this comment is great...

The Great Communitcator had less to do with making 'liberal' a dirty word than the Great Do Nothing he replaced. But I agree, in the interveneing years, no political party, right or left, has done anything to make anything better. But sure, plenty of blame to go around. But I prefer to blame those with whom I disagree....don't you? And someone mentioned the president from Arkansas. Who else could appear at a gathering of anti-logging environmentalists in the morning and a gatthering of lumberjacks in the evening, promise them both that he was totally on their side....and have both groups go home happy! That man is a Jedi!

The one about JC was going through my head as I read Chucks post back a few and the last one about BC and the logging I remember very well.

 

[BobRip]

I have found the true cause of Global Warming. See attachment. I hope this will settle this once and for all.

 

[IH3444]

Media Shows Irrational Hysteria on Global Warming

 

[Egon]

Bob:

Right on in more ways than you may be thinking!

 

[EddieWalker]

Media Shows Irrational Hysteria on Global Warming

IH3444,

That link and article sums it up very nicely. Especially the part about the Midevil Warm Period and how it contradicts current global warming trends. If you eliminate that period of time and what happened back then, it's easy to conclude that the currrent warming trend is manmade.

Unfortunately for those who want to believe it's caused by man, there is that period of time when we had global warming before the invention of the automobile. Maybe it was caused by farmers plowing the fields with mules?

It seems to me that the global warming issue is based on selective facts and manipulating them to make it look like its a man made change in global tempatures. Add in allot of media hysteria and you end up with a political topic that has generated millions, if not billions of dollars, for an industry based on keeping the fear alive regardless of what history tells us.

I still like the earlier post asking what's wrong with global warming? Instead of worrying about all the worse case possiblilities, why not consider some of the benifits? Warmer weather means colder climates will have longer growing seasons and more food for people. Less fuels will be needed for air conditioning. More time spent outdoors and fewer people freezing to death. The list is just as endless for the possible benifits as it is for the possible negatives with neither being correct. Either way, it's gonna happen and we'll deal with it like everything else.

Eddie

 

[IH3444]

My backup plan Eddie is to plant palm trees.........
U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works

 

[Trev]

IH3444,
Unfortunately for those who want to believe it's caused by man, there is that period of time when we had global warming before the invention of the automobile. Maybe it was caused by farmers plowing the fields with mules?
Eddie

There appears to be an even more thorny problem for those who believe the climate changes we're seeing are caused by humans -- the changes appear to be happening in about the same way throughout the entire solar system.

Look at Mars; "global warming", huge storms, disappearance of the polar ice caps. Look at Pluto. Name a planet. Any planet. Look at what's happening with the sun.

Whatever one's beliefs about the causes, or even the existence, of climate change, it's seems a stretch to blame all of this on us.

 

[EddieWalker]

The UN has now downgraded the impact man is having on the planets climate.

Telegraph | News | UN downgrades man's impact on the climate

Eddie