On Aug 22, 9:42 pm, Concerned Consumer wrote:
Cindy, excuse top posting... just wanted to say that while your
efforts are valiant, you are addressing an audience that seems to have
been influenced by the whore scientists recruited by
the Administration and its extractive-industry/academia pimps.
I haven't bothered to follow the thread in detail, as I've heard
the pseudo-scientific arguments before. As to some of the other
posters, there is a strong "apres moi le deluge" component
to their " thinking". Don't they have children -- grandchildren?
What I found particularly delightful was the series of posts -- some,
ISTR from Adams? -- denouncing, in paranoid terms, the thousands of
responsible scientists, as well as concerned citizens, as belonging to
"movements" aimed at turning the US into a "socialist paradise", and
linking those concerned with our posterity to Save the Whales, Mothers
Against Drunk Driving, etc. Their POV on 9/11, fluoride, etc. must
make hilarious reading.
For an excellent article on how the "global warming deniers"
are recruited, and by whom -- naming names -- see the
August 13 Newsweek.
Thanks. Regardless of how one feels about global warming, the deniers
seem like the person who will spend the last dollar in his bank
account
without regard for whether they'll need it for a rainy day. Frankly,
my view
is that petroleum is so valuable for its non-fuel uses that it's
absurd to
burn it for its energy value. (Of course, I'm not a chemist; perhaps
the
results of cracking crude oil yield plenty of goodies apart from
fuel. I
should take a look; it might be interesting reading.)
Cindy Hamilton
Concerned Consumer
On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 10:37:58 -0700, Cindy Hamilton
wrote:
On Aug 21, 4:32 pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
Cindy Hamilton wrote:
On Aug 21, 9:53 am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Dick Adams wrote:
"HeyBub" quotes from: "The True Believer"
__ Bob __ wrote:
"Global Warmiing" is a myth .. .. the warmest years on record
were 1934-1935 .. .. and just a few years ago, the "scientists"
that are predicting out torrid demise were warning about the
"impending" ice-age. Make up your minds just what you want us
to be alarmed about and stick with it .. .. some scientists !!
I'd appreciate a cite for those warmest years.
Here ya
go:http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...5_temperature1...
Your link appears to indicate that 1934 was the warmest year on record
in
the United States, and that the change in the records did not affect
global
temperatures.
True, but the Canadian researcher had access only to the US records. His
re-tabulation puts the lie to the notion that everything's been warming up
since WW2.
It is tempting to equate the United States with the world, but it is
simply not
the case. Global temperatures are up, regardless of any variations in
a
particular location.
True. But a hundred years worth of data is worth some consideration.
We can argue over the causes of global warming, and whether changing
our
consumption of fossil fuels will have any good effect. However, I am
convinced
that reduction of consumption is a good thing regardless of the reason
why
we do it. I don't spend every cent of my paycheck, and I don't think
we
should wait until we're out of oil before figuring out what else we
can use.
We are not running out of oil. Ever year, EVERY YEAR, since they started
keeping records, oil reserves have increased world wide.
No, our knowledge of where the oil can be found has increased. The
amount of oil
has decreased.
And even if we DO
run out of oil, we'll find an alternative. The Romans ran out of wood, much
of Europe ran out of coal. There will be an alternative.
We won't find an alternative unless we look. Doesn't it seem
imprudent
to wait until it's almost gone, when we could develop alternatives
sooner?
And are you equally convinced that reduction of consumption is a good thing
regardless of the consequences? Do you really want to go back to 1933? Think
Polio, Smallpox. Think DENISTRY!
Somehow I fail to see the connection between consuming fewer scarce
resources and forgetting how to vaccinate people.
Cindy Hamilton