The Daily Telegraph is running an interesting piece on how global warming was much worse in the Middle Ages. No doubt it’s all related to Ye Olde SUV Oxcart…
Yes, I know about the typo… it’s been a very long week…
Global Warming Goes Medieval
Published
First, I’d like to give you a half-round of applause for recognizing, if only briefly, that the world continues to go on and there are other subjects than the war worth talking about.
Second, use spell-check next time. “Medevil” sounds like a term that would be more applicable to the dangerous “tort reformers” seeking to disassemble Americans’ litigation rights to appease the usual suspects–their corporate campaign contributors. It certainly doesn’t apply to the “medieval” period in the middle of the last millennium.
Tragically, you rely upon thin, one-dimensional writings that support your fringe right-wing perspective on matters besides sending other people to war, which is highly unfortunate. I realize pollution is worn as a badge of honor by Republicans, and any perceived threat to profits for their constituency is inherently flawed, but the overwheleming strength-in-numbers of the opposition who still live on Planet Earth (at least until it fries) must be disheartening otherwise you wouldn’t have to turn to the studies about the climate in the 15th century as a desperate attempt to say “See, I told you so.”
Yes, the climate fluctuates and we’re currently going through a warming trend. But virtually all real-world science that comes from a source other oil companies and their subsidiaries shows that the accelarated emissions in the post-industrial world, combined with an ever-growing population are contributing to a warmer Earth than anything previously seen in an underpopulated and uncivilized Earth. Is it really that far-fetched for you guys to believe that the human element and large-scale pollution and emissions element puts us in uncharted territory with the modern global warming trend? Is it practical to suggest that global warming and cooling trends will prod along unfettered as they did 600 years ago and beyond when all credible science suggests otherwise?
I guess it’s not surprising that the same people willing future generations financial ruin for their own self-serving desires are just as apathetic about willing future generations environmental ruin. With Good Friday around the corner, listen hard to see if you can hear the distant cries of the children and grandchildren of present-day Republicans pleading “Why have you forsaken me?!” as they get nailed to a financial and environmental crucifix by their elders.
The typo has been fixed… my bad.
I am certainly not in favor of pollution, but I am not in favor of pseudo-science either. The environmentalist movement is based upon the use of misleading data, fabricated evidence, and blatant scare tactics in order to push an agenda that is only cloaked in the idea of "saving the planet". I would be much more sympathetic to the movement if it were about the wise use of resources and actually encouraging responsible environmental practices. Unfortunately, such reasonable messages are often drowned in a sea of alarmist rhetoric and political radicalism.
Where’s the psuedo-science?
Let’s walk through this here…
1. The planet IS warming. Fact.
2. Excessive warming is BAD. Fact.
3. We ARE contibuting. Fact.
The only possible question is: how much of the mess we are making is to blame for said warming?
Forty some years ago all indicators were pointing towards us heading into a new ice age. Glaciers were expanding rapidly all across the globe, sea levels droping, ecologists where shitting thier pants. That has now completely reversed and then some in a relative blink of the eye on the geological time scale. Even one as dense as you, Jay, has to acknoweledge that something pretty damn strange is afoot.
Now I might just be too much of a shut-in, but last I checked the enviormentalist movement was all about “wise use of resources”. I’d like to know when the hell that changed and how in the hell I would miss something that drastic…
On a completely un-related note: Why are we forbidden to resize our comment windows? This tiny window size is quite the pain in the ass when composing a lengthy comment…
I agree that there’s plenty of extremism to be found in the environmentalist movement. I’m particularly appalled by the recent Greenpeace lobbying of starving African nations, effectively scaring their governments into rejecting American food imports because they were politically incorrect GMO crops. There is undoubtedly plenty of extremists in the global warming issue as well, but the science and sheer numbers indicate that global warming is a real-world concern that needs to be addressed. Could everybody except the oil companies and those on their payroll really be wrong?
I agree that there’s plenty of extremism to be found in the environmentalist movement. I’m particularly appalled by the recent Greenpeace lobbying of starving African nations, effectively scaring their governments into rejecting American food imports because they were politically incorrect GMO crops. There is undoubtedly plenty of extremists in the global warming issue as well, but the science and sheer numbers indicate that global warming is a real-world concern that needs to be addressed. Could everybody except the oil companies and those on their payroll really be wrong?