Why Global Warming is a Crock
Having lived a half century on this planet, I have real doubts as to the predictions of "experts", mainly because they have such an incredibly poor track record:
- In the 60's the experts said we would be out of oil by the year 2000, yet today we have more oil reserves than ever. In fact, some fields believed to have been "tapped out" are refilling and oil as a renewable resource is being talked about.
- Remember ZPG? That was the zero population growth movement. We were supposed to limit families to two (or fewer) children because the earth just couldn't support the billions of people that we would soon have. Today the birth rate is declining in virtually every western nation and we are looking at immigrants to support our retirees.
- Ah yes, the water scare. It wasn't only oil that we were consuming, the scaremongers were theorizing that we'd be having to move icebergs via barge to southern climes so we could melt them to meet the growing water demands. Turn off your taps! Take a shower with a friend! Conserve!
Next week I'm putting in an irrigation system for my yard — yes, it uses more water than hand watering, but it'll save me a ton of time and trouble and after all, water is cheap. That's because it is still plentiful. - Just last year we heard that the 2006 hurricane season would be as bad or even worse than the previous year (which brought us Dennis, Emily, Katrina, Rita and Wilma) all because of global warming.
The experts predicted 9 hurricanes, 5 of which would be major and at least one of which would make landfall. In reality there were 5 hurricanes, 2 of which were major and a total of 0 made landfall. Zip. Nada. No need to subsidize people who get to live on the shoreline — this year, at least.
In addition, a volcano can belch more greenhouse gases in a single blast than Man turns out in a decade — if you admit that CO2 is not all that important. Even living flora contributes up to 100 times more methane (which is important) than rotting vegetation, but does that mean we should cut down the rainforests to save the planet?
I'm not even convinced that the world is even getting warmer — predictions of a coming ice age are more common than the media leads you to believe. Truth is, the experts just don't know. After all:
Thus, ecosystems result from the sums of infinite individual responses of organisms to stimuli from non-living and living elements in the environment.
Exactly. It's pretty complicated, our knowledge is limited, and our computer models allow for only a small number of variables — and we are even unsure those interact with each other.
Our history of recorded temperatures is short in historical terms, never mind geological epochs. To go further than that one must rely on paleoclimatology, in which oceanic temperatures are derived from plankton fossils and summer growth is divined from evidence of pollen. Forgive me if it sounds a little too much like a CSI episode.
Heck, people are blaming global warming on everything from cosmic rays to sunspots to volcanoes to asteroids to rainforests to sheep farts to, the most popular choice among tree-huggin' hippies, Man.
But in 2003, refining the math models demonstrated that only 0.117% of the greenhouse effect is due to atmospheric CO2 from human activity — but you won't hear that from the fanatics.
Just last year, sixty "climate change experts" said Kyoto is "pointless" because the study of climate change is an "emerging science" and it is impossible to separate the noise from the science.
This year, Katmandu had snow for the first time in 60 years. Record snowfalls blanketed much of our country: 12 feet in upstate New York in ten days, 45 inches in Denver in a single storm, Georgetown had 63 inches in one day. The earliest snow in recorded history hit Argentinean ski resort — it also set a record for the heaviest single snowfall.
As the libs tried to blame record snowfalls on global warming (no, really), Toledo set a new low temperature record, breaking a record set in 1905. Good god, they are even covering their bases by saying that global warming has slowed ocean currents that warm Europe, so a mini-ice age is on the way! Sounds like a rather sophisticated and highly effective auto checks and balances system to me.
With Gore having to cancel his bellicose rantings because he was snowed out, the thing that really gets me is that the greenies will say this is the warmest January in history. But when old French people were dying in Europe because of a hotter-than-usual summer, no one noticed that we were having the mildest, kindest, gentlest summer I've ever experienced.
But even if it turns out to all be true, even if the most dire predictions miraculously pan out, what would happen?
In the great scope of things, just not very much. It would be a few degrees warmer, which means it would be more comfortable for a large portion of the winter. England would have temperate winters, just like the Middle Ages. Farming could take place in Greenland, like the Vikings did. The Sahara would bloom . . . again.
How much land mass would we lose to the oceans if the waters rose a foot? A meter? Three meters?
Go look for yourself at this interactive site. Play with the "what ifs". Heck, put in an incredible 18 meters to see the worst-case. Looking at the the big picture, a few miles of coastline would be submerged. But us in the heartland? High, dry and enjoying wine on our porch in January. Sounds nice to me.
Why are liberals so hysterical? Two reasons, I think.
First, it gives them something to blame on Bush, "Big Oil", and civilization in general. So they have something to whine about over their shade-grown Mexican decaf, imagining how wonderful it will be when mankind is eradicated from the face of the planet, not thinking about being the first to remove themselves from the ecosystem.
Second, liberals live in the coastal regions. It is their homes that will be lost to the ocean. Their cities. Their real estate investments.
If the oceans rise 3 feet, the San Francisco area will be pretty hard hit, If it rises a little more the people east of Sacramento will get beachfront property. Most of highway 101 goes underwater, but hell — we don't even lose Berkeley. Those hippies will still be high, dry, bitching and still moaning.
And that is the real bummer.
Blog post #6487 in category
Global Warming
posted 20 February 07
I couldn't agree more. The doomsday forecasters have been at it since the first man stood on the first streetcorner with a sign saying, "Repent, the end is near." How about Count Malthus and his theory of food shortages? And let me be the first to remind everyone of "Chicken Licken". For some reason that totally escapes me, some people really want to believe that man is the sorryest being to enhabit the planet.
Michael Crichton says it best, "Global Warming is only a theory not a science, Most of the warming in the past century occurs before 1940 before CO2 emissions could have been a factory, between 1940 and 1970 global temperatures actually fell. He sums up by saying that (I'll paraphrase) Man must be the most arrogant of all creatures to think that in the short time of the industrial revolution he could have ruined what has stood for millions of years. So much for Al Gore and his Earth in the Balance.
For a complete listings of Michael Crichton's comments, please go to Heartland.Org
Posted by Tony L on Thursday at 7:58 PM
Abiotic (renewable oil) is a crock; ask anyone who is actually IN the oil business.
Fact: North Sea oil - in decline, has been for years
Fact: In the 1950's Hubbert predicted peaking of US oil production within 20-30 years. Fact: US domestic oil production peaked in the 1970's.
Fact: Indonesia, an OPEC member ( you might recall that OPEC stands for Organization of Petroleum EXPORTING Countries ) became a net oil IMPORTER two years ago.
Fact: Mexico's giant oil field in the GoM peaked last year.
Fact: Conventional oil production in Canada peaked years ago.
Fact: Conventional oil production is peaking all over the world from established fields
Fact: No really significant oil discoveries have been made to alter the downward trend of established oil production, in tandem with increased usage. We are living on borrowed time when it comes to our petro usage.
Fact: Usage, except for a brief OPEC Oil Embargo period in the 70's which sparked a serious recession, of oil goes up each and every year.
Fact: Reserve numbers are not being replaced with hard findings but with fudging of existing known reserves; its more an accounting dance that says with X$ per barrel being the norm, we can expect to recover Y barrels with some profit.
No, we are not going to "run out" of oil; what we will do is see production plateau (may already be seeing that now) and then fall. What's left will be increasingly more expensive.
As for the balance of your post, there are so many factual problems I can barely imagine where to start. Even those of us IN the oil business agree with climate change as a serious, real issue. Pumping billions of tonnes of CO2, and hundreds of millions of tonnes of other gases and elements which have even higher climate change impacts, each and every year is a no-brainer: our "lifestyle" is causing change to the planet - atmosphere, landmasses, oceans, climate, you name it - on a global scale.
Posted by Oil Guy on Monday at 11:57 AM
Dude, are you stupid? You need to seriously check your facts and realize who is benefitting from denying climate change i.e. bourgeoisie degenerates like you. There is not a single university in this world that denies global warming. So next time you want to socialize the masses into believing your bullshit, get the facts straight.
Vive la Canada!
Posted by Cameron Carew on Monday at 7:51 PM
Dude, are you stupid? You need to seriously check your facts and realize who is benefitting from denying climate change i.e. bourgeoisie degenerates like you. There is not a single university in this world that denies global warming. So next time you want to socialize the masses into believing your bullshit, get the facts straight.
Vive la Canada!
Posted by Cameron Carew on Monday at 7:52 PM
Maybe if your face wasn't stuffed with Canadian bacon,and you actually read the whole article you would understand what he said. Get your facts straight???, LOL. This guy is so right about Global Warming being false,and your as blind as a bat. Would you please explain to me why Alaska has darkness for 6 months out of the year if Global Warming is true?. Where's the Sun going to hit Alaska during those 6 months?.
Posted by Online Vigilante on Monday at 4:29 PM