Just a thought
I wanted to give everyone an opportunity to read something I believe in. Now, I know this is hard, but it is definitely worth a look. Even if you are adamantly opposed, at least give the other side a gander and THEN respond. I appreciate any and all comments on this one...
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb
This is from the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Read the complete report if you have time to peruse 128 pages (there is a link at the top.)
It speaks of what I believe and have believed since the "global warming scare" began and became a keyword. Anyone in a science field realizes that all populations and events happen in a sinusoidal pattern. A steady state if you will...the trouble is...our concept of TIME and SCALE is nonequivalent to what we are trying to study...ie) our climate.
Ask your local weatherman what the exact temperature will be in three days. Then hold him to it. If the maximum temperature is not reached or exceeded...ask WHY. WHY wasn't he perfectly correct? How many times have each of you blamed the weatherman for something that did or didn't happen? I've done it. I still do it.
Models.
Models are an ESTIMATE...and the formulas and assumptions that are put into them make for different outcomes. I have recently been asked to judge an assumption based on GIS and remote sensing that some large government agencies have proposed to base some serious decisions on. I look at their data and the writeup on their methodology and can find NO WAY to support it. The myriad of factors that go into predicting what they are trying to make decisions based on are grossly underlooked or shall I say it; completely ignored. It makes me ashamed to even be dealing with the issue. It has something to do with temperature of a "state of matter"...so anyone reading this has at least an idea of what I'm talking about. I shall not go into any details as I don't know the impacts just yet. It is NOT about climate.
I have read reports and documents that proponents of "global warming" have put out. I have NOT read Al's book...nor seen the movie...because I'm not sure of his scientific background or understanding of said science. I don't know what he may have been TOLD and/or what he BELIEVES in to base my distrust on. But what I have done is to look at both sides of scientific papers....not hearsay.
I cannot base what little I know of climate on what I hear in the news or in papers. Yes, the proponents of "global warming" could have errors in there papers. And yes, the people that speak against it may have errors in what they are saying, but why trust what mass media sells you? If you really want to argue an issue, I think all sides should be considered and all reports and documents should be reviewed. THEN form your opinion.
Emotions are different than science, and our knowledge evolves continually.
Just a disclaimer though...I also view this "scare" as a catalyst that will encourage development and support of science that creates other forms of energy. Perhaps these new forms of energy will foster another "scare" or movement that tries to change it...it all seems to in the past. As it is...technology is moving fast and I think energy can move along with it. I think we are going to be immersed in a new world at some point here...BECAUSE of this whole thing. And I'll embrace that as long as people at least recognize the facts behind it all, and aren't led by the Piper into assumed thoughts and beliefs.
Google "nanotechnology" if you want or need examples of where we are certainly headed.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=f80a6386-802a-23ad-40c8-3c63dc2d02cb
This is from the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works. Read the complete report if you have time to peruse 128 pages (there is a link at the top.)
It speaks of what I believe and have believed since the "global warming scare" began and became a keyword. Anyone in a science field realizes that all populations and events happen in a sinusoidal pattern. A steady state if you will...the trouble is...our concept of TIME and SCALE is nonequivalent to what we are trying to study...ie) our climate.
Ask your local weatherman what the exact temperature will be in three days. Then hold him to it. If the maximum temperature is not reached or exceeded...ask WHY. WHY wasn't he perfectly correct? How many times have each of you blamed the weatherman for something that did or didn't happen? I've done it. I still do it.
Models.
Models are an ESTIMATE...and the formulas and assumptions that are put into them make for different outcomes. I have recently been asked to judge an assumption based on GIS and remote sensing that some large government agencies have proposed to base some serious decisions on. I look at their data and the writeup on their methodology and can find NO WAY to support it. The myriad of factors that go into predicting what they are trying to make decisions based on are grossly underlooked or shall I say it; completely ignored. It makes me ashamed to even be dealing with the issue. It has something to do with temperature of a "state of matter"...so anyone reading this has at least an idea of what I'm talking about. I shall not go into any details as I don't know the impacts just yet. It is NOT about climate.
I have read reports and documents that proponents of "global warming" have put out. I have NOT read Al's book...nor seen the movie...because I'm not sure of his scientific background or understanding of said science. I don't know what he may have been TOLD and/or what he BELIEVES in to base my distrust on. But what I have done is to look at both sides of scientific papers....not hearsay.
I cannot base what little I know of climate on what I hear in the news or in papers. Yes, the proponents of "global warming" could have errors in there papers. And yes, the people that speak against it may have errors in what they are saying, but why trust what mass media sells you? If you really want to argue an issue, I think all sides should be considered and all reports and documents should be reviewed. THEN form your opinion.
Emotions are different than science, and our knowledge evolves continually.
Just a disclaimer though...I also view this "scare" as a catalyst that will encourage development and support of science that creates other forms of energy. Perhaps these new forms of energy will foster another "scare" or movement that tries to change it...it all seems to in the past. As it is...technology is moving fast and I think energy can move along with it. I think we are going to be immersed in a new world at some point here...BECAUSE of this whole thing. And I'll embrace that as long as people at least recognize the facts behind it all, and aren't led by the Piper into assumed thoughts and beliefs.
Google "nanotechnology" if you want or need examples of where we are certainly headed.
posted by geotracker12 at 5:11 PM
1 Comments:
Another good post about which, more later. In the meantime, this keys in well:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/global_hot_air_from_the_bbc.html
Post a Comment
<< Home