A Truly Inconvenient Truth
I ran into this article on CarandDriver.com. It gives information that has been given several times in the past. However, the likely truth of our part in global warming escapes those such as Al Gore whose movie, An Inconvenient Truth, this article is about. It is inconvenient for environmentalists to understand a basic truth, that the world is in constant change and that the warming of Earth could actually be occuring on a natural basis as it has in the past. How nice of them to give humankind the power trip of thinking we can control the climate.
Sometimes I wonder if environmentalists spew their extremist views to justify their existence. What would they be doing if they weren't raising alarm to a problem that we may have little part in, if any at all?
posted by Titus Todd @ 7:26 AM
7 comments
7 Comments:
titus todd,
Have you seen the movie? Gore does not dismiss the possible "natural" causes of the earth warming. Be he does lay out in convincing detail the dramatic acceleration of the trend over the past few decades. He also looks at historic heating and cooling trends, and there is no question that the current heating trend is atypical in its intensity.
Moreover, there are almost no scientists of any repute who dispute the underlying science of global warming. The consensus in the scientific community on this is overwhelming.
It would seem that the alarmists are not Al Gore and the scients who have reached this consensus, but those whose livelihood and riches depend on the continued unrestrained burning of fossil fuels. You know, like people in the oil and automotive industries... and perhaps people who write for Car and Driver.
To keep making the bucks manufacturers are spending billions on alternative methods of making their vehicles go. I'm not so sure the automobile industry is stuck on fossil fuels. They'll go where the money is and we see growing interest in alternative fuels and hybrids. Automobile manufacturers are not so much in bed with oil producers as they once were - the relationship doesn't bear as much fruit anymore.
The Car and Driver article provides irrefutable science. If humankind is the major culprit behind global climate change, there's a lot more research to be done.
What is "the science of global warming" mean? I'm sure no scientist will dispute there is global warming but there are plenty of those who will refute the extent of humankind's blame.
I'm not an apologist for those who think we should do nothing. It is easier and more fun to disagree with the alarmist side because they are so rabid and sure of themselves. The do-nothings are just complacent and selfish.
What is "the science of global warming" mean? I'm sure no scientist will dispute there is global warming but there are plenty of those who will refute the extent of humankind's blame.
Actually, no. The ovewhelming consensus in the schientific community is that the current trend of global warming is the result of human activity.
I'm nowhere near qualified enough to critique the Car & Driver article. But it is ridiculous to dismiss Gore and others who champion a reduction of carbon emissions as simple alarmists when the scientific community is in general agreement with him about causes and likely impacts.
As I said, Gore never disputes that the earth goes through warming and cooling trends. The point is the the current trend tracks almost perfectly the growth of industry and the increase in man-made carbon emissions into the atmosphere.
As for the auto industry, they are slowly shifting their focus to alternative because that's where the market is going. And the market is going there because a) consumers are weary of high oil prices and b) consumers are increasingly aware of global warming and are interested in taking steps to combat it.
The ovewhelming consensus in the schientific community is that the current trend of global warming is the result of human activity.
I've never seen proof of that. There is a petition running around that disputes that consensus signed by multiple scientists (thousands of which are qualified to express their opinion on the subject) who have expressly stated the evidence isn't there.
titus todd is right
the only thing that the majority of scientists agree on is that there is in fact a warming trend occuring.
There is no consensus that humankind is responsible. The earth is composed of a complex system of hundreds or thousands of systems which work together. This is what makes earth sciences so difficult. It's not like you can directly test one independent variable and observe outcomes.
Sure there's a warming trend, but there are many things that cause it. These other things are solar forcing/modeling, solar luminosity. Both of these other causes have been written and documented as possible factors of global climate change. Some even suggest these causes are more to blame for the warming trend the humans.
There is actually a large number of people who side with this philosophy. The problem is the liberally controlled media which only want to spew their arrogant, anthropocentric rants about human participation.
Just because an argument is only presented from one side on the tv and movie venues does not mean there isn't another side. Check your facts next time before you further misconceptions about a topic.
Hi! I'm tagging you for a "MeMe", if you'd care to participate! Check it out.
I forgot about this discussion until titus todd came to my blog and wished me a happy birthday. (Thanks!)
Anonymous, most of my information about climate change comes from a variety of governmental, NGO and international agency sources, not the "liberally controlled media," whatever that is. And since you saw fit to offer some advice to me, I'll return the favor: you can catch more flies with honey than vinegar. Condescension isn't a great way to get through to someone whose view or opinions you don't agree with or that you think are incorrect.
Post a Comment
<< Home