December 19, 2008

Global slight of hand.

First off thank you to the Wizard for the link!  Second thank you Wizard for this article.

Chad Myers echo's quite a few of my beliefs about Man-made global warming.  To start with we have 100 years of good data.  For a .000002% sampling (based on the world being 4.5 billion years old).  With that tiny sampling it is small wonder that the best climate models preform so poorly.

Even with all the people and all the factories spewing all the greenhouse gasses into the planet. Mount Pinatubo was able to cool the planet surface 1.3 degree's for three years. 

El Nina and El Nino have had a much more profound impact on the weather then people as well.  We are pretty damn insignificant portion of a huge planetary system.

Australia realized that they could throw millions of millions of dollars without lowering the temperature 1 degree. Is the planet sending out less heat then it is attracting?

If humans are the cause and they can reverse the trend, exactly what would that look like?  We need to stop using oil, our electrical usage has to drop to the level of green production, then we have to look to stop all non-green industry, then go after natural occurring phenomena. 

Welcome to the return of the dark ages.   Do you really think we can do all of the above in the seven years we have left?  If we did indeed destroy civilization as we know it and find out that it did not matter one iota, will we all have a good collective laugh or cry?

If your listening only to the MSM about this topic, your probably mis-informed.  If you drill down to who said what and looked up the person and who is paying him.  You might have a better idea of what end they are talking out of.


flyingvan said...

Dark ages is right. No one's looking at amortizing the cost of replacing 30 year infrastructure stuff like bridges and power grids---we've created a generation of people that actually believe the world won't be here in a few decades thanks to an unscientific diatribe from a failed presidential candidate.

Lee said...

I recall driving with my folks and seeing all sorts of cans and bottles on the side of the road. In some places they were a hazard for popping a tire.

They put that deposit on them of a nickel and suddenly you do not see that kind of litter at that quantity.

An incentive to make a choice. It also jump started aluminum and glass recycling.

The high price of gas recently was incentive as well. Incentive to travel less, to drive a smaller car or to purchase something with better gas mileage.

We are pretty lucky that the price\availability and performance of electrical cars was out of whack. Or else we would see the demand for electrical go up without a way to increase supply.

Stella said...

Yes, container deposits gets people to think before they throw away. Sometimes, they just don't care, but it would at least reduce litter.

Gas prices down here were almost $5 a gallon. I ended up on one bus, 40 minutes to work. It was so easy, when I need to go to my office (I telecommute), I take the bus 30 miles. That and my mp3 player make a pleasant trip, even though it's three hours.

You're right, Flying Van. No one is looking at the national infrastructure: the Bush Administration decreased this budget. I include the interstate system and dams (water resources and hydroelectric power) with bridges and power grids.

I guess it's not a sexy topic, but it's a direct reason for the havoc caused by Katrina. If any issue is bipartisan, infrastructure easily qualifies.

We posted a Global Warming post on ice sheets. This is so complicated.

Best to you both.