It's been COLD elsewhere
Talk about a one-trick pony: There are no easy solutions to climate change, bemoans a Washington Post editorial, which concludes that we must nevertheless “confront the menace of global warming.”
Well, I’ve lately been confronting that menace right here in Stafford with a smug smile. If ever there was a milder winter hereabouts, I don’t remember it.
Fact is, we seem to have enjoyed a whole string of them. Granted, memory is tricky, but the last really bitter winter I can recall here was in Dec.1995-Feb. 1996.
So I think global warming is actually pretty cool. It’s surely better, I’ve heard, than global cooling, which demonstrably does a more effective job of killing off us humans.
I know. They say we’ll lose polar bears and see lots of giant pythons slinking around Aquia Creek before long if we don’t do something.
However, if we don’t do something or even if we do, global cooling may be upon us as we speak. Beyond our luckily warm Virginia county, the evidence over the past year for a cooling planet has exploded. China had its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad shivered, not to mention much of America north of here.
And now, hard scientific fact confirms: It‘s been cold. All four major global temperature tracking outlets have released updated data. All of them show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously, ranging from 0.65 degree centigrade to 0.75.
That’s enough, according to researcher Michael Asher (in Daily Tech blog) to wipe out nearly all the warming recorded over the past 100 years--the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down, it‘s claimed.
As you may have also noticed, the climate so far in the 21st century hasn’t warmed a bit, either. That doesn’t deter the believers a bit. In a recent New York Times piece, devotee Michael E. Schlesinger at the University of Illinois said that any such evidence undermining the established theory that accumulating greenhouse gases are making the world warmer was, “a waste of time...a harmful distraction.”
Speaking of distractions, check this out: The National Research Council‘s Kenneth Tapping, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.
Whatever. The Post’s beloved “menace of global warming” threatens to rob us all of hard-earned cash. And not just for those expensive new light bulbs. Here’s syndicated columnist Walter Williams: “Our buying into global warming hysteria will allow politicians to do just about anything, upon which they can muster a majority vote, in the name of fighting climate change as a means to raise taxes.”
What got the Post so worked up that it spewed out such editorial twaddle? From Princeton and the Nature Conservancy came a study warning that the increased use of biofuels like ethanol to replace gasoline would subject more forested lands to be plowed to grow more biofuels. Those farmed lands then will yield up much more nasty CO2 to our “endangered” atmosphere than is saved by the switch from fossil fuels .
Never mind that what the world really needs, thanks to increasing population, is more food from crops--not ethanol--to stave off starvation.
And guess what? Friend Dennis Avery of the Hudson Institute has been preaching that gospel for years, long before global warming ever became a bogey man. Then in 2006 he wrote, “With both population and incomes rising, world demand [for food] will more than double in the next 40 years.
The world is already farming one-third of the Earth’s land area, including almost all of the land worth planting to crops. If we burn the corn in our cars, what will we and the livestock eat?” Yield-increasing high-tech farming can soften the coming population impact but only if it produces more food, not SUV fuel.
Meanwhile, here in Stafford, how soon will we have to turn in our trusty old incandescent light bulbs? Don’t laugh. It could come to that, given this insane drive to limit CO2 emissions. But just in case, I’m starting to stock up on the bargain bulbs before they’re banned.
A reader quoted in USA Today, concerning the switch to the costly and dangerous florescent bulbs, said, “This is an easy way to address global warming. We all have to participate. That’s all there is to it.”
No, there’s much, much more. Unfortunately, most of the coming controls will be for no sane reason.
And make no mistake about it, more controls are coming. All the presidential candidates mouth the same words, that we must control global warming. “We” means the government, backed by trendy science.
But what if the global warming scientists are wrong? Perish the thought. However, how interesting it is that the Grand Canyon is older by 11 million years than “scientists” had always claimed.
And by the way, as climatologist Richard Lindzen notes, the fancy computer models beloved by the global warming enthusiasts failed to anticipate the absence of warming over the past decade. I wonder why.
Well, I’ve lately been confronting that menace right here in Stafford with a smug smile. If ever there was a milder winter hereabouts, I don’t remember it.
Fact is, we seem to have enjoyed a whole string of them. Granted, memory is tricky, but the last really bitter winter I can recall here was in Dec.1995-Feb. 1996.
So I think global warming is actually pretty cool. It’s surely better, I’ve heard, than global cooling, which demonstrably does a more effective job of killing off us humans.
I know. They say we’ll lose polar bears and see lots of giant pythons slinking around Aquia Creek before long if we don’t do something.
However, if we don’t do something or even if we do, global cooling may be upon us as we speak. Beyond our luckily warm Virginia county, the evidence over the past year for a cooling planet has exploded. China had its coldest winter in 100 years. Baghdad shivered, not to mention much of America north of here.
And now, hard scientific fact confirms: It‘s been cold. All four major global temperature tracking outlets have released updated data. All of them show that over the past year, global temperatures have dropped precipitously, ranging from 0.65 degree centigrade to 0.75.
That’s enough, according to researcher Michael Asher (in Daily Tech blog) to wipe out nearly all the warming recorded over the past 100 years--the single fastest temperature change ever recorded, either up or down, it‘s claimed.
As you may have also noticed, the climate so far in the 21st century hasn’t warmed a bit, either. That doesn’t deter the believers a bit. In a recent New York Times piece, devotee Michael E. Schlesinger at the University of Illinois said that any such evidence undermining the established theory that accumulating greenhouse gases are making the world warmer was, “a waste of time...a harmful distraction.”
Speaking of distractions, check this out: The National Research Council‘s Kenneth Tapping, who oversees a giant radio telescope focused on the sun, is convinced we are in for a long period of severely cold weather if sunspot activity does not pick up soon.
Whatever. The Post’s beloved “menace of global warming” threatens to rob us all of hard-earned cash. And not just for those expensive new light bulbs. Here’s syndicated columnist Walter Williams: “Our buying into global warming hysteria will allow politicians to do just about anything, upon which they can muster a majority vote, in the name of fighting climate change as a means to raise taxes.”
What got the Post so worked up that it spewed out such editorial twaddle? From Princeton and the Nature Conservancy came a study warning that the increased use of biofuels like ethanol to replace gasoline would subject more forested lands to be plowed to grow more biofuels. Those farmed lands then will yield up much more nasty CO2 to our “endangered” atmosphere than is saved by the switch from fossil fuels .
Never mind that what the world really needs, thanks to increasing population, is more food from crops--not ethanol--to stave off starvation.
And guess what? Friend Dennis Avery of the Hudson Institute has been preaching that gospel for years, long before global warming ever became a bogey man. Then in 2006 he wrote, “With both population and incomes rising, world demand [for food] will more than double in the next 40 years.
The world is already farming one-third of the Earth’s land area, including almost all of the land worth planting to crops. If we burn the corn in our cars, what will we and the livestock eat?” Yield-increasing high-tech farming can soften the coming population impact but only if it produces more food, not SUV fuel.
Meanwhile, here in Stafford, how soon will we have to turn in our trusty old incandescent light bulbs? Don’t laugh. It could come to that, given this insane drive to limit CO2 emissions. But just in case, I’m starting to stock up on the bargain bulbs before they’re banned.
A reader quoted in USA Today, concerning the switch to the costly and dangerous florescent bulbs, said, “This is an easy way to address global warming. We all have to participate. That’s all there is to it.”
No, there’s much, much more. Unfortunately, most of the coming controls will be for no sane reason.
And make no mistake about it, more controls are coming. All the presidential candidates mouth the same words, that we must control global warming. “We” means the government, backed by trendy science.
But what if the global warming scientists are wrong? Perish the thought. However, how interesting it is that the Grand Canyon is older by 11 million years than “scientists” had always claimed.
And by the way, as climatologist Richard Lindzen notes, the fancy computer models beloved by the global warming enthusiasts failed to anticipate the absence of warming over the past decade. I wonder why.
posted by Ben Blankenship at
10:13 AM
