Okay, whenever I hear the words "global" and "warming", my eyes will glaze over and usually roll into my forehead. And that mainly happens because most of the evidence seems based on waht has happened over the past few years or decades. In truth, we have nothing in terms or long-term definitive proof of these claims. And really, there is no definitive proof against these claims either. I do think there are ways that we can improve how we protect the environment. Recycling and trash reduction are very valid and good things to do no matter how you feel about the issue.
But then, I found this article yesterday. Global warming sceptics buoyed by record cold. I am sure most of you have heard about it. Again, I am not saying that this should be taken as empirical evidence. And even the author of the piece makes this note:
*smirk* Very well said."OK, so one winter does not a climate make. It would be premature to claim an Ice Age is looming just because we have had one of our most brutal winters in decades," writes Lorne Gunter in the National Post.
"But if environmentalists and environment reporters can run around shrieking about the manmade destruction of the natural order every time a robin shows up on Georgian Bay two weeks early, then it is at least fair game to use this winter's weather stories to wonder whether the alarmist are being a tad premature."
3 comments:
Yes, I chuckled when I saw that and practically guffawed at this empirical evidence.
I just liked seeing a mainstream news source say something like this. You always can find blogs that will graft on to one side or the other.
This upholds the addage that there are three sides to every story. his version, her version, and the truth.
I think the truth is nobody really has a clue what the climate is doing. Hell, forecasters can't even give a reliable prediction beyond five days. Disrupting our economy over whether we may *think* the climate is heating or cooling is foolishness.
Post a Comment