Comments on: Reality Distortion Fields and the Great Global Warming Consensus http://www.americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/ Intelligent Criticism in the Service of a Better Nation Sat, 20 Mar 2010 18:35:40 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: American Madness » Blog Archive » Fuck You Albany http://www.americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/comment-page-1/#comment-127905 American Madness » Blog Archive » Fuck You Albany Wed, 09 Apr 2008 13:52:08 +0000 http://americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/#comment-127905 [...] written often on this site about the faulty science and dirty dealings used to create the false impression of a scientific consensus about the effect of C02 on the [...] [...] written often on this site about the faulty science and dirty dealings used to create the false impression of a scientific consensus about the effect of C02 on the [...]

]]> By: American Madness » Blog Archive » Global warming creationism http://www.americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/comment-page-1/#comment-122933 American Madness » Blog Archive » Global warming creationism Wed, 27 Feb 2008 03:02:35 +0000 http://americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/#comment-122933 [...] will like this [...] [...] will like this [...]

]]> By: Jason http://www.americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/comment-page-1/#comment-119017 Jason Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:50:33 +0000 http://americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/#comment-119017 Swen, I completely agree with you. But my suggestion that the experiment needs a control isn't satisfied just by the historical record of the Earth. That tells us what Earth was like in the past without humans - not what would be happening now without humans. But I take your point that maybe we can learn a little from the past and recognize that the Earth has gone through many warming and cooling periods none of which had a disastrous effect on the planet. I also agree with Swen on the point that we perceive any change as necessarily bad. Do you suppose people who live in Iceland will mind having a warmer climate? Or those Newfoundlanders who will once again be able to grow grapes? Okay, maybe some. Certainly as someone who lives in THE hottest place in Europe, even a change in 1 degree Centigrade would make a huge difference to me. But I'll just move to Reykjavik. Also, humanity has a tendency to be incredibly anthropocentric in this area. "Any changes that occur on the planet MUST be the result of us!" When oil reserves run out or become scarce, the world will finally grow up about nuclear power. Swen, I completely agree with you. But my suggestion that the experiment needs a control isn’t satisfied just by the historical record of the Earth. That tells us what Earth was like in the past without humans – not what would be happening now without humans. But I take your point that maybe we can learn a little from the past and recognize that the Earth has gone through many warming and cooling periods none of which had a disastrous effect on the planet.

I also agree with Swen on the point that we perceive any change as necessarily bad. Do you suppose people who live in Iceland will mind having a warmer climate? Or those Newfoundlanders who will once again be able to grow grapes? Okay, maybe some. Certainly as someone who lives in THE hottest place in Europe, even a change in 1 degree Centigrade would make a huge difference to me. But I’ll just move to Reykjavik.

Also, humanity has a tendency to be incredibly anthropocentric in this area. “Any changes that occur on the planet MUST be the result of us!”

When oil reserves run out or become scarce, the world will finally grow up about nuclear power.

]]> By: Josh Friedlander http://www.americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/comment-page-1/#comment-119013 Josh Friedlander Mon, 07 Jan 2008 17:34:31 +0000 http://americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/#comment-119013 All the bad news makes me happy. Let Oil go to $200, because it just make innovation in solar, wine and water power more economically viable. But in the short-term, it is going to lead to more wars and stress as nations fight for scarce resources. The Chinese are already seriously militarizing. Everyone talks about China's need for huge amounts of raw materials as if this is a great Demand equation that will fuel exports. And it is, but at some point it will be necessary for China to ensure that it can import what it needs, and relying on global trade isn't likely to satisfy them. All the bad news makes me happy. Let Oil go to $200, because it just make innovation in solar, wine and water power more economically viable.

But in the short-term, it is going to lead to more wars and stress as nations fight for scarce resources. The Chinese are already seriously militarizing.

Everyone talks about China’s need for huge amounts of raw materials as if this is a great Demand equation that will fuel exports. And it is, but at some point it will be necessary for China to ensure that it can import what it needs, and relying on global trade isn’t likely to satisfy them.

]]> By: Swen Swenson http://www.americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/comment-page-1/#comment-118944 Swen Swenson Sun, 06 Jan 2008 21:54:22 +0000 http://americanmadness.com/2008/01/03/reality-distortion-fields-and-the-great-global-warming-consensus/#comment-118944 Jason asks: <i>"... where is the control? Where is the Earth without human beings putting carbon into the atmosphere to see what kind of climate shifts would occur?"</i> I'd suggest that we can find that control in the geological and archaeological record, which tells us that 20,000 years ago we had an ice sheet up to 1 mile deep blanketing most of North America north of th 40th parallel, and that 7000 years ago we had an area of open, blowing sand extending across Wyoming and Nebraska larger than the present-day Sahara. 1000 years ago we had grapes growing in Newfoundland, indicating the climate was warmer than today and suggesting that warming may not be all bad. The climate changes continually. Given sufficiently accurate instruments the real surprise would be if no change could be observed. The problem and controversy arise in explaining the observed change given our current state of ignorance, in extrapolating a short period of perceived warming into the long-term future, in the sentiment that any change must inevitably be bad, and that by reducing our consumption of fossil fuels in the US we can somehow stabilize the world climate while giving a pass to the emerging third world, particularly China and India, or that we can somehow convince China and India to remain underdeveloped. Personally, I think we should reduce pollution of all kinds wherever we can, if only as a quality of life issue. No one wants to live where the air burns your eyes. There are also good arguments for developing more diverse sources of energy and using the energy we do produce more efficiently. But I don't think we're going to achieve any of that by crippling our economy or by handing yet more control of the economy to the government, the usual solutions suggested by the global warming alarmists. Jason asks: “… where is the control? Where is the Earth without human beings putting carbon into the atmosphere to see what kind of climate shifts would occur?” I’d suggest that we can find that control in the geological and archaeological record, which tells us that 20,000 years ago we had an ice sheet up to 1 mile deep blanketing most of North America north of th 40th parallel, and that 7000 years ago we had an area of open, blowing sand extending across Wyoming and Nebraska larger than the present-day Sahara. 1000 years ago we had grapes growing in Newfoundland, indicating the climate was warmer than today and suggesting that warming may not be all bad.

The climate changes continually. Given sufficiently accurate instruments the real surprise would be if no change could be observed. The problem and controversy arise in explaining the observed change given our current state of ignorance, in extrapolating a short period of perceived warming into the long-term future, in the sentiment that any change must inevitably be bad, and that by reducing our consumption of fossil fuels in the US we can somehow stabilize the world climate while giving a pass to the emerging third world, particularly China and India, or that we can somehow convince China and India to remain underdeveloped.

Personally, I think we should reduce pollution of all kinds wherever we can, if only as a quality of life issue. No one wants to live where the air burns your eyes. There are also good arguments for developing more diverse sources of energy and using the energy we do produce more efficiently. But I don’t think we’re going to achieve any of that by crippling our economy or by handing yet more control of the economy to the government, the usual solutions suggested by the global warming alarmists.

]]>