Global Warming?

[Chuck52]

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. Certainly there were left wing environmentalists who opposed nuclear energy development, especially after Three Mile Island, but they never had much real power and they were hardly alone. Was anyone clammoring for nuclear power? 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. Follow the money is a phrase that comes to mind, and money knows no ideology. Environmental concerns also tend to follow the whose-ox-gets-gored path. Florida's governor has, I believe, opposed some oil development plans which might have impacted his own state.

Is Science a Liberal field? My point in citing the NAS as a reasonable source for information about the state of scientific debate on global warming was that body is rather diverse. The only member I personally know seems rather conservative to me. The other guy I know whom I figure might be elected to membership regularly cancels my votes. 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.

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.

Chuck

 

[LMTC]

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.
Chuck

And who, good sir, do you reference as "the Great Prevaricator?"

 

[cp1969]

And who, good sir, do you reference as "the Great Prevaricator?"

He must be talking about Clinton. Just has his decades mixed up.

 

[_RaT_]

I agree completely. I would also say, taken as a whole this thread has been civil and educational



I could agree with this in principle. The fact is, that boat has sailed. Global Warming is now a globally political hot potato. ( Is Dan Quail around? I'm not sure I spelled potatoe correctly....how's that for balance?). There are too many people on both sides of the issue with political and ideological investments in it. It is almost impossible (or even reasonable) to discuss the issue without considering those investments. But, as I said, for a bunch of weekend warrior tractor jockeys we're doing a pretty good job of it.



We're all big enough to shrug off a snide remark or two aren't we?

I would like to throw a couple of things in the mix that I think worthwhile to consider. First, the nuclear issue. Nuclear energy was very methodically and successfully stifled in this country by left leaning environmentalists. I doubt there would be much debate about that. And god forbid that I point at the Europeans with anything but contempt but they have handled nuclear energy quite well. In any case, fast forward, and you have the very same type of people if not the very same people telling us that we must now break our dependance on fossil fuel because we are going to fry in our own atmosphere. They killed nuclear energy which for all practical purposes hooked our wagon to the two headed monster, dependance on foreign energy and the middle east. They also assured that our very own resources (Gulf of Mexico, ANWAR) were off limits and even production (refinerys) were hamstrung. And now all they can suggest, in any real or practical sense, is that we just get along without the energy we need and desire. They have no solution to a monster that they created! Why should I believe them now or even consider trusting their "science". How many times does their science and their advice have to be absolutely wrong and disastrous before we quit believing them?

Second point. We (the US) are not going to be the problem child for long. China, India, the Pacific rim and to a lesser degree Russia, are poised to eclipse us economically and industrially. (They will probably eclipse us militarily as they form tacit allegiances with our terrorist enemies upon whose rock our ship has foundered.) And rest assured, China, India, Russia and the Pacific rim have no interest in environmentalism. It is their turn to grow and conquer and prosper. We can wring our hands and gaze at our navels and bask in self contempt about how bad we have been to the environment but these guys are going to make us look like choir boys. And in this regard, is it even fair for us to tell them that they can't have their day? In the 1800's we raped and pillaged this continent to get to the point we are now. Is it fair for us to tell them they can't do the same thing with their continent? I think not. It certainly opens us to the charge of hypocrisy anyway.

Which brings me to this final point, which is not my own. A few years ago there was an article in Atlantic Monthly about this. The gist of the article was that no one really knows if global warming is real or if we caused it or not. Given our current addiction to fossil fuel and the ascension of Asia, it makes no difference. Even if we did have the power to affect globle climate, we don't have and won't have the power to fix it. There is no government budget, global economy or global will that has nearly the money or science to fix the problem even if we did cause it. So if its real, we better just learn to deal with it.

I'm planning on buying some ocean front real estate in Asheville, NC.

George, excellent comments, I really enjoyed reading your post. You write much of what I am thinking. I cannot help but to think that nuclear energy or some form of it will be our salvation. Mapping our destiny based on oil looks quite dismal. On the otherhand, eliminating much of our oil addiction gives us much to be hopeful for.

 

[dmccarty]

N80,

I like what you said....

Except for

I'm planning on buying some ocean front real estate in Asheville, NC.

I live EAST of Asheville at about 500 feet elevation. I don't like what you said. Not at all. Nope Nope Nope.

There was a program on the History Channel, that just ended, about the mini ice age. Some of my skepticism regarding Global Warming is covered in the program.

Later,
Dan

 

[Egon]

Somehow I seem to recall reading that ice ages occur during periods of global warming.

 

[Doc_Bob]

N80:
Plus, they play these games here because they CAN play these games here.
Bob

Yes, we are an easy mark.
Bob

 

[Doc_Bob]

Somehow I seem to recall reading that ice ages occur during periods of global warming.

Yes, that is true. In 1985 the "experts"were talking about an ice age coming upon us. 20 years later, same folks, different tune. And people wonder why these same "experts" have lost credibility?
Bob

 

[Egon]

No, no -- It takes Global warming to create the ice age.

Heat is required to produce percipitaion in excess of what can melt in the winter.

 

[dmccarty]

No, no -- It takes Global warming to create the ice age

There is a theory that says that the melting ice caps will change the movement of the ocean currents which would cause cooling and possibly an ice age.

Later,
Dan