|
"Duped into believing in this junk science"
by Bill, May 26, 2006
I have been surfing your site and have added it to my favorites so I can stop and check out the latest news. I was impressed with your layout and your comments, they made you seem more credible than most. However, today I read your comments on an article regarding global warming and you stated in your comments that genocide will be the end result of continuing to ignore global warming.
This is very scary to me as it looks like you both have been duped into believing in this junk science. There are some things going on with the climate, the earth has warmed .6C since 1880, but this means absolutely nothing. The supposed .6C rise in temperature falls under the margin of error for the data, which is .7C.
Furthermore, this is absolutely NO proof that human activity has had anything to do with this slight rise. Mount St. Helens threw more CO2 and other pollutants into the atmosphere than all human activity since the 1800s.
This is, most likely, part of the earth’s natural cycle and to chicken little it is nothing short of ridiculously extreme fear mongering. There is simply not enough data to make a definite statement, but you two seem to have jumped on the extremist bandwagon with no reservations or even questioning any of their so-called data.
As you should know, the fanatical claims made by these green radicals depends entirely on their computer models and they guess, yes GUESS, as to what values they should input. Obviously, they input data that lends credence to their wild claims that man is destroying the planet. This is because they hate themselves and the human race and if we give them any credibility without strictly following the scientific method, they will be the ruin of us.
You both seem so rational and skeptical, why you believe this nonsense is beyond me and does great damage to your credibility.
Regards,
Bill
|
|
Bill,
I'm not going to address your email point by point, because it's just too tedious and tiresome. It's a waste of time.
But I do want to briefly explain our position on global climate change, so we can link to this page the next time someone sends an email along the same lines as yours.
For several years, I worked as a science abstracter, reading peer-
reviewed scientific journals and translating ("abstracting") the gist of academic studies and jargon-laced articles into layman's English for Biology Digest and Physical Sciences Digest.
In that job I read and abstracted thousands of studies, and of these, several hundred were related to various aspects of global climate change, everything from the ability of freshwater fish to survive as more topsoil is washed into streams and rivers, to the dwindling natural habitat that supports polar bears.
The articles' conclusions varied, of course, but the facts were always ugly. Some studies estimated that a certain species of plant or animal would last a few more decades. Sometimes it was less than that. Some studies considered what humans could do to lessen our impact, and articles occasionally mentioned previous studies which had been ignored as the situation grew worse...
None of the studies were about the authors hating themselves or "hating the human race," as you claim.
|
| |
And none of the studies concluded that it was unclear, ambiguous, or an open question whether human activity is adversely affecting the planet's ability to sustain life.
So shall we believe these hundreds of studies in peer-reviewed journals written by men and women with scientific credentials, none of which dispute the central facts of global climate change ...?
Or shall we believe an email from a stranger signed Bill who tells us it's all nonsense from cuckoos who hate humanity?
Sir: The facts are in and the evidence is overwhelming. Bit by bit over the past century or so, human technology has altered the earth's climate and atmosphere. These changes are accumulating toward a point of no return, a point where, even if humans took drastic action, it would be too late to reverse much of the damage already done.
Very nearly every reputable scientist working in these fields understands this, and by "very nearly" I mean it's virtually unanimous -- at least among experts who aren't on the payroll of an oil company or an arch-rightwing think tank.
But it will be years before the problems are obvious to the un-informed, and addressing the issues behind global climate change will cost money, so it is in the short-term self-interest of unprincipled wealthy and powerful parties to pretend that the facts are in dispute. They air lying commercials, publish 'greenwashing' ads, send spokespeople to spew manure on talk shows, and try to paint anyone who sees the problem -- 99+% of the experts -- as a "Chicken Little" lunatic fringe.
Sorry, there's no kind way to say what must be said: People who say the issue is undecided or the science is junk, as you claim, are liars or dupes, and we're not going to play along.
We won't pretend there's any 'dispute' about global climate change, and we won't make much effort to get through to you, for the same reason we won't argue at length if you tell us that Santa's reindeer can fly.
Our time is limited, and we're seeking to address an audience of people who are concerned about -- not hiding from -- the major issues of our time.
Helen & Harry |
There's much more than this at Unknown News.
|
We appreciate the heck out of everyone who helps.
|
|
|
|
|
| |
The dialogue page is our
"letters to the editor" section.
Unknown News is more fun and more informative with your participation, so please don't be shy. Consider yourself invited to speak your mind.
Submissions to 'Dialogue' are solely the opinions of the authors, and are published as received without editing or vetting by Helen & Harry. Any errors of fact, spelling, or punctuation are assumed to represent the author's unique creative style.
We're especially interested in hearing and considering different perspectives. All we ask is that you conduct yourself sanely and civilly. For the most productive dialogue, it helps if you'll cite a specific article or concept we've gotten wrong.
You can contact Helen & Harry at <unknownnews at myway.com>. If that address ever fails, our back-up email address is <newsuneed at yahoo.com>.
But please, don't email us unless you're really and truly, honestly, actually trying to send the publishers of Unknown News a communication you're not sending to anyone or everyone else.
Please don't send attachments or other crap we don't want.
If you're trying to reach us but getting no reply, it's probably because you've sent us crap we don't want, so we're filtering your emails into the trash, unopened and unread.
If you'd like to have your email address unblocked, simply send a sincere apology (from an un-blocked email address).
Anything sent to Unknown News
may be published.
If you don't want it published,
say so plainly.
Of course, we publish
all incoming hate mail.
|
|
When we publish incoming emails, we usually remove the sender's last name, email address, or anything else that would tend to uniquely identify the author (if we slip up, please let us know). But if your email is unambiguously intended only to annoy, insult, or threaten us, we'll publish all the details, and leave it on-line forever.
| |
|
|
