View Single Post
Old 06-01-2006, 09:00 AM   #18
Textcritic
Acerbic Cyberbully
 
Textcritic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: back in Chilliwack
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bingo
I'm not pushing global warming as a myth, but I'm one that thinks we should all slow down and actually figuere this thing out before bad decision after bad decision is made for the wrong reasons.

Add to that Al Gore's track record of self promotion and blathering to the media and it all makes me a little uneasy.
I will second this.
There is a minority within the scientific community who believes that while the subject of sustainability is a noble enterprise and worth study, it needs to be tempered with a more cautionary approach than that which has been taken by the environmental movement. Is global warming happening? Probably. Has it been accelerated through the burning of fossil fuels and carbon based technology? Probably? Will continuing pollution trends destroy the planet in less than 100 years? This last point seems extremely debatable. We as a species and our planet have demonstrated in our respective histories an enourmous capacity for adaptability.
Scientists like Carl Sagan and Paul Ehrlich have been making forecasts of irrevocable and inevitable doom and catastrophes for DECADES, and so far none of them has come to pass. I was taught in school in the late '90's that by 2005 the air would be practically unbreathable; that half of the earth's species would be extinct; that oil and gas reserves would be practically completely depleted. none of it has happened.
My point is this: climatologists and environmental scientists have far from a flawless track record when it comes to the accuracy of their projections. Why should we spend the VAST amounts of money required to protect ourselves on something that MAY or MAY NOT happen in the next 100 years?
By the way, my introduction of Chrichton into this debate was probably short-sighted. As interesting as State of Fear was, I recognize as well as anyone that a piece of fiction does not constitute scientific research. Bjørn Lomborg is a much more credible and reliable source from which to argue. Chrichton just happens to be one of his supporters.
Textcritic is offline   Reply With Quote