FACTS VS ASSUMPTIONS

I just watched "Supper Club", hosted by Tom Bergeron on the new Planet Green TV series.

As usual, the talk turned to Global Warming. After some discussion, guest Catherine Oxenburg wondered why, if Global Warming was a 'hysteria' over a manufactured crisis, are the poles melting; polar bears now on the endangered species list?

As I've said, I'm all for not destroying the Earth, but it's obvious Ms. Oxenburg hasn't done any homework or she would know that the polar ice-caps on Mars are also melting and that there are many, many more polar bears in the Artic as in recent history.

The scientific community is at odds over the very existence of global warming and, even assuming we ARE in a warming, the causation and impact thereof. Ms. Oxenburg's questions illustrate the sad willingness of people to jump on and support a movement without serious and intellectually honest debate.

Moral of this story? The jury is still out, no matter what Gore (energy-sucker extraodinaire) says. And destroying the economy of the US is not going to help the Earth in any way, shape or form, regardless of what Earthly problem is at hand.

SCIENTISTS STIFLED

From the US Senate Committe On Environment and Public Works comes a report that shatters current Global Warming alarmist platforms. But the scientists challenging the global warming alarmists' theories of human causation of the alleged phenomenom are having a hard time getting their views out to the public.

Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.

“Many of my colleagues with whom I spoke share these views and report on their inability to publish their skepticism in the scientific or public media,” Paldor wrote.

I'm as concerned as anyone else about the health of Earth's environment. I'm not against humans leaving the 'smallest possible footprint' but I honestly think that since Gore - after having been 'backseated' by Slick Willie's star power, having been humiliated when Bush withdrew the US from the Kyoto Treaty (Gore being an author of said treaty) and his failed bid for the Whitehouse - is really hating being dragged kicking and screaming into obscurity. Honestly, just who can take him seriously with his personal energy-sucking lifestyle? Certainly no one who is the least bit intellectually honest.

At a global warming conference/debate mega-author/novelist Michael Crichton made a few wry observations about the most visible and vocal of the "humans cause global warming" crowd.

"I would like to suggest a few symbolic actions that might really mean something. One of them, which is very simple, 99% of the American population doesn’t care, is ban private jets. Nobody needs to fly in them, ban them now. And, and in addition, let’s have the NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council), the Sierra Club and Greenpeace make it a rule that all of their members cannot fly on private jets. They must get their houses off the [electrical] grid. They must live in the way that they’re telling everyone else to live. And if they won’t do that, why should we? And why should we take them seriously?

I suddenly think about my friends, you know, getting on their private jets. And I think, well, you know, maybe they have the right idea. Maybe all that we have to do is mouth a few platitudes, show a good, expression of concern on our faces, buy a Prius, drive it around for a while and give it to the maid, attend a few fundraisers and you’re done. Because, actually, all anybody really wants to do is talk about it."

"I mean, haven’t we actually raised temperatures so much that we, as stewards of the planet, have to act? These are the questions that friends of mine ask as they are getting on board their private jets to fly to their second and third homes."

Like, don't pee down our back and tell us its raining, man!

GLOBAL WARMING

According to an article in the Financial Times, a diminution of C02 in the atmosphere might just have horrific consequences and plant life is currently enjoying a substantial growth period with the increased levels.

"Why the increase? Their 2004 study, and other more recent ones, point to the warming of the planet and the presence of CO2, a gas indispensable to plant life. CO2 is nature's fertilizer, bathing the biota with its life-giving nutrients. Plants take the carbon from CO2 to bulk themselves up -- carbon is the building block of life -- and release the oxygen, which along with the plants, then sustain animal life. As summarized in a report last month, released along with a petition signed by 32,000 U. S. scientists who vouched for the benefits of CO2: "Higher CO2 enables plants to grow faster and larger and to live in drier climates. Plants provide food for animals, which are thereby also enhanced. The extent and diversity of plant and animal life have both increased substantially during the past half-century."

Looks like global cooling is way more dangerous than warming!