Text 1378, 137 rader
Skriven 2006-06-02 21:27:00 av Robert E Starr JR (1824.babylon5)
Ärende: Re: Atheists: America's m
=================================
* * * This message was from Josh Hill to rec.arts.sf.tv.babylon5.m * * *
         * * * and has been forwarded to you by Lord Time * * *         
            -----------------------------------------------             

@MSGID: <v7g1825m775ftfp3a3icgqsg754e0kve8p@4ax.com>
@REPLY: <4doo3mF1aipnpU1@individual.net>
On Mon, 29 May 2006 21:30:35 +0000 (UTC), "Vorlonagent"
<jt@otfresno.com> wrote:

>"Paul Harper" <paul@harper.net> wrote in message=20
>news:lj1m72ddd0ptmg160fpodnunkrh3emt9sj@4ax.com...

>> Again, we'll have to agree to disagree. [It is my belief that] We only
>> have a limited amount of time left when we can afford the luxury of an
>> overly self-centred existence. "I" *has* to have a limited shelf life
>> now. We are going to have to ditch all of that and start becoming a
>> lot more wider-focused. In between AIDS, assorted health pandemics,
>> global warming and various energy crises that are here or looming, the
>> "I'm alright Jack" approach to existence is an evolutionary dead end.
>
>30 years ago, people were fretting about the imminent onset of the next =
ice=20
>age.

You know, I've heard that claim often enough, but I sure don't
remember it -- just the oft-repeated and likely accurate assertion
that we're in an interglacial period -- which leads me to suspect that
it's yet another exaggeration or fabrication. And even if it had been
true, I'm not sure it would have much bearing on the current debate.
After all, people once believed that dinosaurs were cold blooded and
that the continents didn't move, but that doesn't mean that we
shouldn't or wouldn't or don't believe that dinosaurs are warm blooded
or that the continents do move.

Check out what Paul Krugman said about the "global cooling" bit the
other day:

"While I'm at it, I can't resist mentioning another piece of
Swift-Boating, this aimed at climate science as a whole: the claim
that 30 years ago climatologists were all worried about global
cooling. A good example: In a 2004 article, George Will informed
readers that a 1976 paper in Science 'warned about =93extensive Northern
Hemisphere glaciation".'

"The truth about that 1976 paper is here. In fact, the paper was
solely concerned with the effects of long-term variations in the
Earth=92s orbit. It specifically declared that the forecasts did not
take into account 'anthropogenic effects such as those due to the
burning of fossil fuels.' And what was the forecast? 'The results
indicate that the long-term trend over the next 20,000 years is
towards extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation.' Somehow, I doubt
that Mr. Will=92s readers realized that the paper in question said only
that if we leave out the effects of greenhouse gases, the Earth might
have another ice age a few thousand years from now."

http://krugman.page.nytimes.com/

I'd also strongly recommend the column which led to this reply to a
reader, "The Swift Boating of the Planet":

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/05/29/opinion/29krugman.html?n=3DTop%2fOpi=
nion%2fEditorials%20and%20Op%2dEd%2fOp%2dEd%2fColumnists%2fPaul%20Krugman

It's a good account of how an energy industry flack discredited a
well-known climate scientist, of the depths to which they're willing
to sink.

>Right now, the truth is that we simply don't know.  Our understanding of=
=20
>global climate is still too limited, allowing politics to insert itself =
into=20
>science.

>Historically, people create gods to fill the gaps labelled "we don't kno=
w."=20
>That's worth remembering when listening to debate on global warming.

As I understand it, that could have been said a decade ago, when there
was still controversy among climate scientists (as there always is
when something new comes along), but not today, except by the oil
companies and their shills. Worse, new evidence suggests that the
computer models have in fact underestimated the problem, and that the
recent increase in hurricanes is in fact related to the warming
process.

Check out this essay by former warming skeptic Gregg Easterbrook.
Unfortunately, his article is now in the pay archive, but these
excerpts suggest its overall tenor:

"Has anything happened in recent years that should cause a reasonable
person to switch sides in the global-warming debate?=20

"Yes: the science has changed from ambiguous to near-unanimous. As an
environmental commentator, I have a long record of opposing alarmism.
But based on the data I'm now switching sides regarding global
warming, from skeptic to convert.=20

"Once global-warming science was too uncertain to form the basis of
policy decisions -- and this was hardly just the contention of oil
executives. ''There is no evidence yet'' of dangerous climate change,
a National Academy of Sciences report said in 1991. A 1992 survey of
the American Geophysical Union and the American Meteorological Society
found that only 17 percent of members believed there was sufficient
grounds to declare an artificial greenhouse effect in progress. In
1993 Thomas Karl, director of the National Climatic Data Center, said
there existed ''a great range of uncertainty'' regarding whether the
world is warming. Clearly, the question called for more research.

"That research is now in, and it shows a strong scientific consensus
that an artificially warming world is a real phenomenon posing real
danger:

[snip numerous prestigious scientific organizations saying evidence
for global warming is now compelling, including a Bush Administration
program]

"Case closed. Earth's surface, atmosphere and seas are warming; ocean
currents are slowing; ice shelves are melting faster than projected;
spring is coming ever sooner; rainfall patterns are changing; North
American migratory birds are ranging father north; the ability of the
earth to self-regulate to resist warming appears to be waning. While
natural variation may play roles in climatic trends, overwhelming
evidence points to the accumulation of greenhouse gases, mainly from
the burning of fossil fuels, as the key."

http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=3DF40B1EF63B5A0C7=
78EDDAC0894DE404482

--=20
Josh

"I'm not going to play like I've been a person who's spent hours involved=
 with foreign policy.
I am who I am." - George W. Bush
     
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: Time Warp of the Future BBS - Home of League 10 (1:14/400)