trysail
Catch Me Who Can
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2005
- Posts
- 25,593
One Of The Big Ones
Now you've gone and done it, Monique. You've inspired me to write about one of the "big ones" (as in PET PEEVES). I have purposely avoided doing this before because I am, apparently, one of ten people in the world who holds the opinion that I do- and I am acutely aware that folks have been lynched for less reason, a fate I have no intention of tempting.
Nonetheless, here goes: GLOBAL WARMING IS A THEORY. It is not fact. Contrary to the loud assertions of a certain well-known former Vice-President, contrary to the endlessly repeated media reports, and contrary to the public's brainwashing, there is no scientific consensus. The data are not conclusive. I am sick and tired of the media's constant blaring and repetition of a flat-out inaccuracy.
"Not dumb" people like Michael Crichton and William Gray, Ph.D. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Gray ), have said the same thing. In fact, a lot of "not dumb" people have said it. So why does the media continue to report it as accepted fact? Why? Why? Why? Everytime I hear some dumbass local reporter or Charles ("No Einstein") Gibson, or the Beeb (the Beeb, for god's sake! Can you believe it? What has the world come to?) glibly blame global warming for this or that, my blood pressure rises and I start screaming at the offending radio, television, or webpage. (I don't bother when it's NPR or PBS, having assumed right from the git-go that they were a lost cause).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consensus
Should I expect this to happen every time a bunch of otherwise unemployable English majors are asked to evaluate science? God help us all!
Please note that I am not suggesting that I know, one way or another, whether the THEORY of global warming is correct. I don't. I do know that there is absolutely no balance in the reporting or any effort to provide balance, whatsoever.
______________________________________________________________
Home Page- NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies – Surface Temperature Analysis
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/
Punta Arenas, Chile
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=304859340004&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Alice Springs, Australia
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=501943260004&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Clyde, NWT, Canada
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=403710900006&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Christchurch, NZ
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=507937800000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Kamenskoe, Siberia
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=222257440004&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Rome, Italy
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=623162390011&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Paris, Le Bourget
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=615071500001&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
For a pictorial refutation of rising sea levels see:
http://www.john-daly.com/
It shows a picture taken in 2004 of a mark made by Captain Sir James Clark Ross on Tasmania, that marked mean sea level in 1841. The photograph was taken at low tide on 20 January, 2004. The mark is 50 cm across; and the tidal range is less than a metre.
As you can readily see, there has been no significant change in sea level for the last 165 years.
monique1971 said:Snow in April. Why, why, why?
Now you've gone and done it, Monique. You've inspired me to write about one of the "big ones" (as in PET PEEVES). I have purposely avoided doing this before because I am, apparently, one of ten people in the world who holds the opinion that I do- and I am acutely aware that folks have been lynched for less reason, a fate I have no intention of tempting.
Nonetheless, here goes: GLOBAL WARMING IS A THEORY. It is not fact. Contrary to the loud assertions of a certain well-known former Vice-President, contrary to the endlessly repeated media reports, and contrary to the public's brainwashing, there is no scientific consensus. The data are not conclusive. I am sick and tired of the media's constant blaring and repetition of a flat-out inaccuracy.
"Not dumb" people like Michael Crichton and William Gray, Ph.D. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_M._Gray ), have said the same thing. In fact, a lot of "not dumb" people have said it. So why does the media continue to report it as accepted fact? Why? Why? Why? Everytime I hear some dumbass local reporter or Charles ("No Einstein") Gibson, or the Beeb (the Beeb, for god's sake! Can you believe it? What has the world come to?) glibly blame global warming for this or that, my blood pressure rises and I start screaming at the offending radio, television, or webpage. (I don't bother when it's NPR or PBS, having assumed right from the git-go that they were a lost cause).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_global_warming_consensus
Should I expect this to happen every time a bunch of otherwise unemployable English majors are asked to evaluate science? God help us all!
Please note that I am not suggesting that I know, one way or another, whether the THEORY of global warming is correct. I don't. I do know that there is absolutely no balance in the reporting or any effort to provide balance, whatsoever.
______________________________________________________________
Home Page- NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies – Surface Temperature Analysis
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/station_data/
Punta Arenas, Chile
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=304859340004&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Alice Springs, Australia
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=501943260004&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Clyde, NWT, Canada
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=403710900006&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Christchurch, NZ
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=507937800000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Kamenskoe, Siberia
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=222257440004&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Rome, Italy
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=623162390011&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Paris, Le Bourget
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/g...py?id=615071500001&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
For a pictorial refutation of rising sea levels see:
http://www.john-daly.com/
It shows a picture taken in 2004 of a mark made by Captain Sir James Clark Ross on Tasmania, that marked mean sea level in 1841. The photograph was taken at low tide on 20 January, 2004. The mark is 50 cm across; and the tidal range is less than a metre.
As you can readily see, there has been no significant change in sea level for the last 165 years.