On Mar 28, 5:26�am, John H. wrote:
On 28 Mar 2007 00:13:37 -0700, "Chuck Gould"
wrote:
On Mar 27, 8:46?pm, Jack Redington wrote:
Your big object to this is it does not go lock-in step with what you
have been told. I did watch the whole thing. Many of the questions you
ask about are answered in the film.
made by documentary-maker Martin Durkin
*- more information on it can be found athttp://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swi...
Jack Redington- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
I'm extremely comfortable with a diversity of ideas. As should we all
be. If we automatically reject every idea because it's new, we will
stop learning.
My objections a
1) one sided (as was Al Gore's)
2) hand picked scientists all in perfect agreement regarding every
detail. (scripted) A genuine mix of experts will perhaps agree in
general principle but be of different opinions regarding the details.
3) inconsistent argument, as noted, regarding CO2 being a trailing
indicator and the statement that the climate cooled until 1985
Chuck, please recommend a documentary that meets your approval. The CO2
numbers, which you'll see when you go back to watch the whole documentary,
lag the temperature numbers by some 800 years, not 40.
I am surprised that you and Don will not watch the whole thing. Perhaps
learning something different is a no-no?
Lastly, I highly recommend a book written by a liberal. The book is "The
Skeptical Environmentalist" by Bjorn Lomborg. I'll make it easy for you:
http://tinyurl.com/2nabsq
--
***** Hope your day is better than decent! *****
* * * * * John H- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Sorry, but I can't recommend a propaganda piece for either side of the
question that won't incorporate the fatal flaws of all propaganda
pieces. As far as "learning something" goes, it's important to
evaluate the motivations of the aspiring teacher before gobbling down
the mental gruel. One can "learn" all about jews, blacks, catholics,
and homosexuals on any of the KKK websites, for example, but most
folks won't do so because the bias is so strong.
Thanks for recommending a book by a liberal, but liberal bias is no
more useful in this debate than is right wing bias.
Who do I trust? Being a mariner, I tend to trust the NOAA. Oddly
enough, I also trust- in this case, the President of the United
States, George W. Bush. Bush oversees the Administrative branch of the
US Government and does so very actively. Throughout his first six
years in office he has never been shy about firing cabinet members,
federal prosecutors, and others who don't toe his political,
philosophical, or administrative line. I don't say that to start some
discussion about the president- only to point out that heads of
important departments and agencies need to function in a way that
meets his personal approval or risk being dismisssed. Also, I am very
eager to agree that this practice is no different under GWB than it
has been under almost every president since Washington.
I think we can all agree that Geroge Bush isn't some "left wing enviro-
nut".
Here's what one of the agencies that report to the POTUS says about
the global warming issue:
http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/basicinfo.html
(Their climate measurements and models are provided by NOAA)
Everybody who burns fossil fuel for recreation should be following the
global warming issue very intently. As I have been confirming yet
again in my discussions with state and city environmental agencies
this week regarding the boat soap issue, boaters are easy targets for
meaningless grandstand regulations and restrictions because there are
so few of us. A band-aid on public problems, with very little cost to
the public at large.