Think In Pen & Ink


Cato said...

There is too many unknowns, including the effects CLOUDS have on global warming. Considering water vapor is a much greater "threat" if you will for causing a greenhouse effects than CO2 could ever hope to be, perhaps it needs further study. A quarter of a century ago, there were calls for government to put an end to global cooling. Governments should just stay out of it and let theshifing sands of public opinion go ever which way they might. The effects of teh sun are also largely unknown although recent studies point to the sun's cycles as a major part in recent warming trends. Human induced local warming is a proabbility, I will admit, but we just can't produce enough CO2... then even conceeding that it IS happening and IS happening because of humans, even the UN's ridiculous global climate change group (which said it has no idea as to the validity of it's own numbers deep into it's documentation on the matter--will find the quote for you later) says that it would be a boom for agriculture. What,we're feeding more people cheaply. I don't see a problem.

Antartica's ice sheet, by the way, is growing, and has been this century, reversing a 5,000 year trend... will find sources for all of this at some later date. Like tommorow. If you are lucky.

AndyRand said...

CATO: Please don't cite some article
from the Exxon Mobile funded junk science brigade.

This is what a recent Washington Post
article claims:


Antarctic Ice Sheet Is Melting Rapidly
New Study Warns Of Rising Sea Levels

By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 3, 2006; Page A01

The Antarctic ice sheet is losing as much as 36 cubic miles of ice a year in a trend that scientists link to global warming, according to a new paper that provides the first evidence that the sheet's total mass is shrinking significantly.

I was skeptical about global warming claims as well. But most peer review
studies in scientific journals are not talking about growing icesheets.

Cato said...

You say my studies are biased, studies which I have not linked. So I'll make wild assumptions about who funded yoiur studies too.

Are not all studies biased? Your world-domination-bent UN who will use "desertfication" and other buzzwords to take over the globe use studies to you know, and I find them extremely biased. If you don't believe me, check out HABITAT I & II, Agenda 21, and "biospheres." Chicago is a "biosphere," and on paper, the UN has "control" of it (city planning, family planning, etc.). Yay Jimmy Carter! While people scoff at this many of the enviornmental programs that the Federal government does is all in lines with what the UN mandates.

Which means one very terrifing thing: the people of the United States are no longer it's soverigners. Can't give up one inch or all is lost. So well... if we answer to the UN, on anything, we've given up quite a lot, like control of our country. Government of the [crossout]people[/crossout]U.N., by the [crossout]people[/crossout]U.N., for the [crossout]people[/crossout]U.N.

Cue 666 with conspiracy stuff. Whatever, I don't care.