[asa] Global Warming

From: j burg <hossradbourne@gmail.com>
Date: Tue Jul 29 2008 - 11:35:06 EDT

Interesting email today from a friend.

He is a debunker of Global Warming.

Here is what he says (note I don'y hold to his position):

"Newsmax Magazine's special report "Al Gore Spins Global Warming"
debunks many widely promulgated notions about the global warming
threat and finds that truth is the first casualty in Gore's
apocalyptic film.

The compelling report by Lowell Ponte author of the best-selling
book about changing climate, "The Cooling" and Marc Morano details
the propaganda blitz about global warming . . . and the facts it

The real reason the media is hyping the dangers of global warming.

Or -- Al Gore's real agenda: 2008.

The Aral Sea and Mt. Kilimanjaro issues two glaring "convenient
lies" in Al Gore's film.

The myth of a man-caused sea level rise: why Florida and California
will remain dry.

How modern temperature-measuring techniques could be giving a "false
positive" to global warming.

Why computer models predicting climate change are necessarily flawed.

The former Democratic senator who brazenly says he pushes the global
warming theory - "even if it's wrong."

What implementation of the Kyoto Protocol would really cost the U.S.

The optimistic global temperature rise projection that Gore ignored.

How a leading doomsayer admits exaggerating the global warming threat.

The increased tornado activity in the U.S. is it really linked to
global warming?

An expert's four common-sense "alternative cures" for global warming.

Why a prominent MIT professor says global warming is an out-and-out fraud.

Time magazine and Newsweek's dire warnings in 1974 of another ice age!

How the global warming scare is cool in Hollywood.

What a leading U.S. expert told the Senate about the "science fiction"
of a disappearing Arctic.

Why we could actually be heading for a cooler, and not warmer, period.

Vice President Gore's "reign of terror" against global warming skeptics.

Why America's top hurricane expert doubts the hurricane-warming connection.

How a clean energy source which already exists could eliminate the
threat of global warming.

And the bottom line for you: How global warming policies will mean
more government, higher energy prices, and more costs and taxes to

I guess the above is the best the contrarians can come up with. I note
that they do not include Glenn Morton's two contrarian reasons, (1)
flawed temperature measurements and (2) evidences that CO2 levels were
higher in the past.

While I pretty much accept the IPCC findings and analysis, I am still
a bit skeptical of the overall issue. Two reasons: (1) the amount of
sunlight reaching the earth is, indeed, dependent on CO2 levels. But
it is much more dependent on water vapor (cloud) levels.
(2) Soot levels also may play a part. If so, this could be an argument
either way.

I continue to be amazed how much politics seems to be involved in this
issue. The "wrathful right" (Rush Limbaugh, for instance), and other
far right groups seem to be uniformly on the side of the contrarians.
Perhaps it is because a Democrat (Gore) is arguing the issue. But that
seems to be a silly reason. Good (and bad) ideas come from all sides
of the political spectrum. As well as from theists and atheists alike.

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue Jul 29 11:35:28 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jul 29 2008 - 11:35:28 EDT