Tacoma - March 15th: An inch of global warming on the ground
March 15th, 2009 by Republican By DefaultFor those of you who refuse to question popular theories of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming, maybe you should reconsider. I’m not asking anyone to accept my view without question, I’m asking you to question both sides of the issue. If you’re a liberal who claims to be open-minded that should be no problem for you.
I’m certainly not the only one questioning the issue, nor are conservatives the only ones. It seems that top scientists in Japan are questioning the man-made aspect of global warming. They question the data used to come to those conclusions and they challenge the climate modeling theories that global warming alarmism is based on.
I’m not used to seeing snow on the ground in mid-March in Tacoma. All across the country record low temperatures have been set this year. How is that consistent with the idea of man-made global warming? Have we solved the problem and this is the result? And if we’ve solved it then we can stop spending tax dollars on it, right?
So maybe you want to argue that these record low temperatures are an anomaly. But we don’t know enough about changes in climate to know if the perceived warming trend of the last few decades was an anomaly.
Climate change has been occurring as long as the Earth has existed, yet climate alarmists base their conclusions on sketchy data from a few recent decades. That’s like listening to a few badly played notes in a symphony that you’ve never heard before and then guessing what the rest of it sounds like.
One thing that should be noted is that most of the studies done on the subject have been government funded. Consider that the only way to continue that funding is if there continues to be a problem to study.
I’m not implying that these scientists are liars but when someone is in a position where a potential conflict of interest exists, and they report their findings, that potential conflict needs to be noted. Liberals criticize a doom-saying minister who gets his income from donations, but they won’t question a doom-saying researcher who gets his income from government handouts. That’s quite a double-standard.