Will SD power structure accept climate change?

I stand corrected - I hope, seeing what they've decided to publish on the topic in the past, they will be agreeable to running some stories that actually go into the real science behind climate change, the fact it is controlled by forces well beyond human control or influence, and the fact that despite several decades of alarmist rhetoric, NOTHING that the IPCC, Al Gore and the "Hockey Team" have warned us about is showing ANY SIGN of coming about. The only thing they DO have going for them is they keep fiddling with both the past hard data concerning temperature measurements, and in the case of JONES he actually destroyed the original data, plus they keep eliminating any stations that show cooling trends or help show that global temperatures are in fact NOT changing significantly. As for the sea levels, I was walking in Torrey Pines one day and some self-proclaimed expert was talking about how devastating sea level increases driven by anthropogenic climate change have been for San Diego. Since my family has been here for generations and there are plenty of old photos showing that in fact very little change in sea level has occurred, the coast is essentially where it has been for much of San Diego's recorded history with only normal, natural erosion changing things much, it was easy to see FROM HARD DATA AND ACTUAL FACTS, that the worries about forthcoming huge changes in sea level were just more nonsense. But here, if you're willing to stipulate that Scripps Institute of Oceanography does contain more than it's fair share of climate alarmists, why do you think they just spent millions to build a facility within a stone's throw of the mean high tide line on a bluff that certainly will be quickly eroded out from under it if their claims have any validity? Why, if Al Gore's fear of major sea level increases is true, did he buy a million dollar property on the shore? My perception is that people who share your views are generally convinced to do so by emotional arguments and, for some curious reason, are resistant and even immune to actual hard scientific data as well as common sense. I'm trying to express it as politely as I can so please don't take it the wrong way. But the simple fact is this isn't rocket science and the evidence is there - why can't you at least consider it? If we were really headed for those huge temperature increases the alarmists, and your article, says are coming, and indeed people like you have been saying were actually underway for the last three decades, why is it not happening? Why is it not here? Time has proven you wrong, yet you cling to a disproven set of beliefs. Why?
— December 5, 2012 2:18 p.m.

Will SD power structure accept climate change?

"Most scientists" is a political argument, not a scientific one. Plus that is incorrect, as a visit to quickly reveals. Those same "climatologists" have been caught red handed faking data and though many have attempted to whitewash and cover it up, the fact remains that even the U.K. Met office now admits there's been no statistically significant warming in 16 years despite continuing steady miniscule increases in atmospheric CO2 year over year. As human CO2 use has fluctuated over the last 150 or so years the CO2 level has continued an essentially linear rise suggesting that the two are NOT related. Much of the surface temperature rise you cite was indeed man-made or should I say "MANN-MADE" as it was "scientists" like Mann who have continually adjusted the data to support their theories. That is not science, that is propaganda. But there's a bigger question I have not yet seen you or anyone address. Who, other than Al Gore, has any HARD evidence that current temperature and CO2 levels are optimum and that warming or higher CO2 is bad? If you bother to check, the current atmospheric CO2 levels are at relatively historic lows. If you bother to check the Earth tends to go through periods of intense cold that last a long time. The warming we are currently experiencing, that started around 15,000 years ago before humans had anything to do with it, is not a bad thing - it is a good thing! Warmer would not necessarily be worse and, as I pointed out in another post here, the conclusions that temperatures will go up uniformly are hasty and already proven false. Much of the alarmism stems from a period where several known REGIONAL climate cycles happened to all line up on the hot side of things and yes, we did have some unusually warm nights and mild winters then, but we do not have the sustained high temperatures alarmists keep saying will be here soon - and they've been issuing dire warnings about that for what, three if not four decades now? All the fuss about two storms, Katrina and Sandy, when in fact the measure of tropical storm intensity, the Accumulated Cyclone Energy Index, shows there is no major uptrend in tropical storms as claimed. Go ahead - tell me what claim of the alarmists you still believe and I'll present HARD DATA that refutes it.
— December 5, 2012 1:59 p.m.

Win a $25 Gift Card to
The Broken Yolk Cafe

Join our newsletter list

Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!