Monday, June 13, 2005

The USA Today thinks that the debate over global warming has concluded:

Link

I'm not so sure that those who reject science and it's conclusions are going to give up so easily, but I do agree that there has been a major shift in recent months toward the obvious truth.  General Electric and other corporations are finally getting the message.

Many of us in the United States are still in denial, clinging to the hope that our fossil fuel dream world can belch carbon endlessly without repercussions.  The US has fallen way behind the rest of the world in our response to this crisis, even though we are responsible for 25% of carbon emissions.  We have apparently chosen the path of least resistance -- do nothing and deny responsibility.

Years from now our children and grandchildren will look back at this debacle with disgust and shame.  They will be paying the cost of the crisis we selfishly ignored.  They will wonder why our country, the worst offender, was unwilling to face the facts and take action with the rest of the world to protect their future by adhering to the Kyoto Protocol.

April was the 2nd warmest on record, and so far 2005 looks to be in the running for the 2nd or 3rd warmest year on record.  Here is a link to the latest global temperature trends:

Link

6/13/2005 11:20:34 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
It's good to have you back; well written and I will read this link!
Suzanne
6/20/2005 1:43:09 AM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
More appropriately human inspired global warming has morphed from quasi-science to religion. The serious debate on causes of global warming has been shouted down, few respectable scientists like some of those who work for Exxon, are given any credence. But I guess when the likes of "USA Today" declare something it must be true.

Don't confuse weather with climate. Citing April's weather has little to do with climate. This winter was also colder than normal - doesn't prove a thing.
6/21/2005 12:37:42 PM (Eastern Daylight Time, UTC-04:00)
I don't think scientists who work for Exxon should be included in the debate on global warming, there is too much of a risk that they will fashion their opinions to meet the expectations of their employer. Similary, I wouldn't put much credence into the conclusions of scientists who are employed by Greenpeace or the World Wildlife Fund. Too much risk of bias there, as well. The global scientific community does a good job of flushing out bias and error, thanks in large part to the internet.

I'm certainly not confusing weather with climate when I reference the NOAA Climate Report. These are global averages compared to historical measurements, and they have nothing to do with the daily weather report or forecast.
Steve
Name
E-mail
Home page

Comment (HTML not allowed)  

Enter the code shown (prevents robots):