Why Al Gore can't control the climate
and should get his big footprint off our economic necks. A) He's not God. B) He's not a scientist, he just plays one on TV.1. 15,000 years ago, sudden climatic warming caused dramatic melting of large Ice Age ice sheets.
2. A few centuries later, temperatures plummeted.
3. 14,000 years ago, global temperatures increased.
4. 13,400 years ago, global temperatures plunged.
5. 13,200 years ago, global temperatures rose rapidly.
6. 12,700 years ago global temperatures plunged sharply
7. 11,500 years ago, global temperatures rose sharply
8. 8,200 years ago, a sudden global cooling lasted a few centuries.
9. 1000 AD global temperatures rose several degrees to begin the Medieval Warm Period, which lasted a few centuries, then around 1230 AD dropped 4 degrees C in 20 years.
10. 1600 AD global temperatures cooled several degrees at the beginning of the Little Ice Age.
See this page by Don J. Easterbrook, list of publications here. His was just one of 100 scientists that I could have listed.
Posts
8 comments:
None of those things mean that man-made climate change is impossible.
It just means that it didn't happen before we had a level of industrialization to cause such things.
As for the inability of man to change the planet or climate: what would you call the day after a global thermo-nuclear war? Unseasonably warm? Mild? Good for you beach-goers?
"a global thermo-nuclear war"
Is there anyone at this post discussing this? Or were we alluding to foolish, grain-fed fuels, weak light bulbs and closed factories? Do you need your own blog to thresh out your concerns?
That these fluctuations have happened repeatedly in the past, both up and down, is at the very least a better indicator that the current warming trend is natural, not man made.
Since Mars' mean temperature rising similar to ours is happening with nothing but the sun's cycles, it's also more likely that our warming trend is also a product of the sun, and not man.
Good list Norma.
I watched a PBS or History channel special on that #10--the last global cooling period. Not pretty. I think we're much better off with the warming cycles.
Mme. Bruce,
The point of contention was, I believe, whether or not man was capable of damaging or altering the earth in a serious and permanent way. I thought that your position was that only God could do such a thing and therefore global warming could not be real.
I was supplying a counter-example.
My apologies if I caused any upset.
So if I get your drift, you're suggesting that Al Gore could control the climate (although damage or alter doesn't sound like much control to me) if he were to propose thermo-nuclear war. Tough sell. He'll probably stick with Chinese mercury filled light bulbs.
Gore never said he was a scientist, he's an advocate. Even if you don't believe in climate change (as most "scientists" obviously, do thus Gore's Nobel Prize), there is a huge hole in the Ozone that is quantifiable... And not good.
And Rachel Carson was just an advocate too, but she has killed more Africans than the slave trade.
I believe we should do all we can to promote a clean environment. No one wants to live in filth. But the Eco-Shakers are promoting their own destruction. Based on the history of climate we know we have these warming and cooling patterns--some lasting hundreds of years, some shorter. The cold ones have been the most deadly with people freezing and starving or leaving their homeland for centuries. Now we finally have advanced to a level of technology that if we have another cooling period, technology might be able to offset some of the damage. But what do the eco-fundies want? Kill western civilization, kill factories, ruin industries--they are evil, leave carbon footprints. Let's get rich and charge people for it. We have a very gullible public, quite self-righteous, who believe in their own power to control climate, yet want to kill the power they do have. Odd.
Post a Comment