By Juanell Garrett, Kansas City Star Midwest Voices Panelist, 2008
A computer hacker has just taken the wind out of the sails of the true believers in climate change (formerly known as global warming and prior to that as global cooling) with the release of emails from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in England.
I found this headline amusing: Scientist: Leak of Climate E-mails Appalling. Poor Kevin Trenberth. Identified as “a well respected atmospheric scientist,” Trenberth said he felt personally violated. I bet Governor Sanford did too when his passionate emails to his Argentinean honey were made public.
There’s no word about how many AP reporters are digging through those 1,000 emails and 3,000 hacked documents available online. They’re probably still tied up fact checking Sarah Palin’s book.
It looks like the MSM needs some help researching the big story. You can search the “alleged CRU emails” (which an editorial board member here dismissed as a “sidelight”) online.
Maybe it’ll give you an alternative activity if the football games are boring or the relatives obnoxious tomorrow. (Hint: “Holdren,” the name of the science czar, will get you some hits. The word “skeptic” will get you a lot.)
“Debate over”? I don’t think so.
A certain former vice-president may need to rename his book and Academy Award-winning movie. How does A Convenient Falsehood sound? Do they ever rescind Nobel Prizes?
Delicious
Digg
More name calling?
Yes, BPH, name calling strengthens your position, with other bullies on the schoolyard.
YOU SAY:
While merit exists in considering "saving" an occaisional species it is presumptuously arrogant to think that man can or should play a major role in that determination.
BPH,
Have you counted the cows lately?
Does saving their species only have a marginal impact on the planet?
How about chickens?
Then you say that the dead zones that exist all around the planet from fertilizer and animal feces is arrogant?
It is self delusion that leads you to think you are not totally responsible for the extinction of species.
I'll keep looking for any rational sense in your deflections, and hope we can actually learn something here.
Keep posting, Earl
You do more harm to the your side than most who argue against it.
Your inability to attribute quotes appropriately is a glaring example of your inability to interpret and digest information and knowledge without ideological prisms in place.
Have you counted the cows lately?
How about chickens?
Then you say that the dead zones that exist all around the planet from fertilizer and animal feces is arrogant?
It is self delusion that leads you to think you are not totally responsible for the extinction of species.
No. I have not counted the cows. No. I have not counted the chickens....nor will I. No relevance to the issue.
I admit I know next to nothing about the "dead zones" you allude to......but, apparently unlike you, I will research them before I accept your attributional assignation to feces and fertilizer. Historical errors (rachel carson) caused too many deaths in servitude to emerging scientific consensus.
It is not self delusion at all Earl. It is absolute indifference.
I believe that the human species is the one we should look out for. Period. Any deference paid to a species of lesser intelligence should be paid ONLY if the human consideration of the time is fully explored, weighed and considered first.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
What side?
Chaz I don't have a side. I am a Constitutionalist whom believes our oil tyranny worldwide is a cancer upon the face of the Earth.
If it is so clean, why not have an oil refinery in Malibu, or Miami?
So Chaz, we are on the same side. We should look out for the human species. To do that we need to stop killing our food supply and paveing or poisoning our tillable acreage.
When every Chinese consumes the same food as you, opens the same gifts under their Christmas tree, and drives the same distance to the corner store in a Hummer for cigarettes, beer, and a lottery ticket, the Earth will run out of resources permanently.
In fact, at current consumption rates, the oceans will no longer support life as in Somalia. The fishermen now eat bush meat,(leapords, tigers, etc) and pirate oil tankers thanks to the Chinese, Japanese, and Russian commercial fishing operations.
I'm on the side of life.
Hopeless
Earl, trying to communicate with you is like talking to a wall.
And the Green Weenies Gonna save Da World1
What garbage, I am sick of these clowns and their cries of doom. In '79 we were all going to freeze to death, and we invented catalytic converters to change carbon monoxide, to carbon dioxide, now CO 2 is a "pollutant"??!!
But you can't argue with a green weenie, because it is a damned religion to them. The most is can hope for is that we do not bankrupt the nation trying to avoid "climate change" (it used to be global warming, remember?).
and the Rooster crows
On the schoolyard, when you have no legitimate counter argument, you call your adversary a name. And then you punch them, or invade(on a national scale) and take their wallet or oil...
Climate change: What happens when a climate changes
Global warming: when a planet's temperature rises.
The two are not interchangeable, nor do they mean the same thing.
You should have come in from recess and listened in class.
Facts, Earl?
The emails that were leaked did imply that a cooling trend was underway. Stick to criticizing the article, what's happening on a dammed river wasn't in the article. Of course man has an impact on his environment, all animals do. Here's a fact, web page logins haven't been around for 20 years. So why insult Kansas (and I'm from MO)? You sound like another liberal elitist, who's in a snit because you THINK you're so much smarter than everyone else who doesn't agree with you.
You agreed.
Thanks, BPH, you say you disagree right after you agree. I like that.
The cooling trend is not in evidence at all.
The planet, especially at the poles is way above normal.
Pointing to e-mails from the past that may or may not say anything factual, the hypothesis here is that because someone thought a cooling trend was happening, and may have tried to hide that FALSE conclusion, is damaging to the individual, but not to any facts about temperatures.
The facts are clear, we are definately approaching a polar tipping point(which will freeze Europe) if the hypothesis are correct.
The climate change from warming will inevitably lead to cooling. How fast these changes occurs will determine wheteher species can migrate and adapt in time to survive.
If you want to freeze Europe, drill baby drill.
EF Schumaker wrotte in 1973, "If it is economically feasable to destroy the world, we will."
Economics as if people don't matter.
Let's go ask a native American how he likes his polluted clams in the bay, since he no longer eats salmon.
OMG
It is all a hoax, and it has been exposed as one. Yet the fruitcakes continue to shout "the sky is falling". Their cries in the face of the these disclosures really ring pathetic. See the previous post as a perfect example. When the lie is exposed, scream "Big Oil", yeah that will work. That's the ticket.
So sad.
Back to school
If you read my post, or are capable of reading for comprehension, I provided one specific FACT about man changing a climate that ended the life of all species. And I pointed out what Man was impacted. The Shrimp fisherman in New Orleans.
Here is another you can ignore:
Man dams river. Salmon run ends. Native Americans no longer eat salmon.
The climate behind the dam is more interesting because now it no longer has an atmoshere(gaseous), rather it is submerged in a liquid.(H2O)
No blind faith required.
No Big Oil.
Just man changing the environment which leads to the extinction of a species man relied on for centuries for sustenance.
You say fruitcake, well if it makes your argument sound more convincing, I suppose in a schoolyard kind of way, you win, biut scientifically you like the writer of this pulp lead story, are both irrelevant.
True denialists are about 5% of the population.(and a shrinking demographic)
Do You Deny Earl...
that "scientists" deliberately withheld data and tried to suppress dissent?
Thank you Juanell for the article... It doesn't surprise me that this was viewed as a side issue by the falling star. The NYT wouldn't even publish an article... Libs don't like it when their devious actions are uncovered!!
Devious actions?
Bush invades Iraq to steal their oil killing hundreds of thousands of humans, shocking the civilized world.
or
Allegedly some scientists were trying to manipulate data.
I won't bother reading about the scientists because all humans are trying to make a living and many, (like Bernie Madoff) have no moral backbone.
Here is what matters:
Man builds a dam for hydroelectric.
Salmon run ends.
Native Americans no longer eat salmon.
Above the dam what used to be a gaseous climate, is now submerged in H2O, a liquid.
The lack of salmon being deposited in the woods by native bear populations, reduces the nitrogen input in the soil, reducing the growth of the forest.
Thinner forests allow more sunlight, warming the ecosystem, allowing invasion from lower elevations, and adding to the rate of melting up at the top.
Malaria now hitting cities that used to be above the mosquito line.
Proof Man changes microclimates and forces the extinction of dependant lifeforms.
No hoax here.
Loon status: confirmed by self proclamation ! ! ! !
Bush invades Iraq to steal their oil killing hundreds of thousands of humans, shocking the civilized world.
or
Allegedly some scientists were trying to manipulate data.
I have not heard the "Bush did it for the oil" canard in over 5 years.......and exactly how much oil did we get out of iraq, Earl?....Oh....none....I forgot. How lame.
"allegedly"...????? WTF is alleged? They were caught cooking the data on which many of the phony postulations were predicated !!
The facts of species extinctions and evolutionary and climate change are variable, constantly changing, and inevitable.
While merit exists in considering "saving" an occaisional species it is presumptuously arrogant to think that man can or should play a major role in that determination.
Life cycle dynamics are such that ANY action has multiple reactions. It is the way it has always been.
You Earl, obviously fall into the bin of the arrogantly ignorant who believe humans should defer their decision making in favor of minnows.
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
Sorry Earl...
deflections don't work here... Bush is no longer Pres., your beloved big 0 with 45% approval rating(going to 37% by next Nov) is
Corrupt science is not science.
Ron Paul
I supported the Ron Paul campaign. Why must people always assume environmentalism goes with a political party?
So they can deflect from environmentalism.
This is about the environment.
When we attacked Iraq in 1991, we used depleted uranium shells from C-130 Hercules gunships.
Later, as our troops muddled through the shredded remains of tanks and bodies, they picked up lethal doses of radioactivity.
Today, these troops are dying from cancers and their children are plagued with birth defects if they make it to term.
A recycling program, to take US nuclear waste and inject it into bullets to spread across foreign lands is a crime against the planet.
I no longer care about the crime against mankind.
Mankind is a reckless self-absorbed species that builds its temporary security on the carcasses of the entire biosphere.
Does a couple of scientists falsifying hypothetical conclusions equal any of the crimes listed above?
If CO2 is less than 50% of warming, maybe even less, then it is the other majority, the majority of extinction events since before the buffalo slaughters that really matters.
Hackin a few e-mails does not eliminate your complicity in the destruction of the world, it just allows you to deflect your consciousness, to act as if nothing you do matters.
But you are not a joke to the planet. You are caustic, and there is mounting evidence your species is on borrowed time.
Uselessness
Just because people have computers doesn't mean they are capable of understanding complex scientific interelationships.
Garret writes:
"A computer hacker has just taken the wind out of the sails of the true believers in climate change (formerly known as global warming and prior to that as global cooling)"
And I see it the opposite:
A computer hacker has just blown some wind into the sails of the corporate lobbies affiliated with oil and gas exploration, ocean transport, military weapons manufacturing, and all the associated industries around the internal combustion engine modes of transportation.
In other words, science has no use for faith. You submit your analysis and sit back and see how long it takes for someone to either build on it or disprove it.
When you associate "blind faith" to individuals who crunch data and work with whole-earth relationships, you do have to have a very broad, almost God-like understanding of how these systems depend upon each other.
Blind suggests no information, yet their is a preponderance of evidence that man is not only responsible for fishing certain species to extinction, but that the loss of these predators causes food chain blooms that end up cascading death until the entire ecosystem collapses, all life extinguished.
This is a microclimate, it is all that mattered to the shrimpers in the Gulf, and now they sit idle at home, their boats rusting away, and the dead zones continue to grow.
What was the basic process that caused this?
Nitrogen fertilizers in corn fields in Kansas. Nitrogen isn't a poison, plants love it. And the algae blooms that lead to the oxygen depletion and methane and sulfur dioxide blooms that ended life in these delta regions all around the planet don't require blind faith. Go ask a retired shrimper .
But faith isn't a component of scientific fact, nor required to disprove hypothesis.
Your mention of global cooling and the word climate change as somehow a substitute for global warming leads me to believe you really aren't looking to change anyones mind, rather gain click-stream revenue for your web advertisers.
Usage of these words always draws hits, and your lack of any relevant detail about climate change is laughable.
But then, it's a Kansas based website. Their login procedure to create an account is about 20 years out of date.