What's new

The latest Global Warming info

Etowah

pitzerwm

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
3,693
Reaction score
10
Points
36
Location
Tri-Cities, WA
Environmentalists' Wild Predictions
By Dr. Walter E. Williams

Now that another Earth Day has come and gone, let's look at some environmentalist predictions that they would prefer we forget.
At the first Earth Day celebration, in 1969, environmentalist Nigel Calder warned, "The threat of a new ice age must now stand
alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind." C.C. Wallen of the World Meteorological Organization
said, "The cooling since 1940 has been large enough and consistent enough that it will not soon be reversed." In 1968, Professor Paul Ehrlich,
Vice President Gore's hero and mentor, predicted there would be a major food shortage in the U.S. and "in the 1970s ... hundreds of millions of
people are going to starve to death." Ehrlich forecasted that 65 million Americans would die of starvation between 1980 and 1989,
and by 1999 the U.S. population would have declined to 22.6 million. Ehrlich's predictions about England were gloomier: "If I were a gambler,
I would take even money that England will not exist in the year 2000."
In 1972, a report was written for the Club of Rome warning the world would run out of gold by 1981, mercury and silver by 1985, tin
by 1987 and petroleum, copper, lead and natural gas by 1992. Gordon Taylor, in his 1970 book "The Doomsday Book," said Americans
were using 50 percent of the world's resources and "by 2000 they [Americans] will, if permitted, be using all of them." In 1975, the
Environmental Fund took out full-page ads warning, "The World as we know it will likely be ruined by the year 2000."
Harvard University biologist George Wald in 1970 warned, "... civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action
is taken against problems facing mankind." That was the same year that Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned, in Look Magazine, that by 1995
"... somewhere between 75 and 85 percent of all the species of living animals will be extinct."
It's not just latter-day doomsayers who have been wrong; doomsayers have always been wrong. In 1885, the U.S. Geological Survey
announced there was "little or no chance" of oil being discovered in California, and a few years later they said the same about Kansas
and Texas. In 1939, the U.S. Department of the Interior said American oil supplies would last only another 13 years. In 1949,
the Secretary of the Interior said the end of U.S. oil supplies was in sight. Having learned nothing from its earlier erroneous claims,
in 1974 the U.S. Geological Survey advised us that the U.S. had only a 10-year supply of natural gas. The fact of the matter,
according to the American Gas Association, there's a 1,000 to 2,500 year supply.
Here are my questions: In 1970, when environmentalists were making predictions of manmade global cooling and the threat
of an ice age and millions of Americans starving to death, what kind of government policy should we have undertaken to prevent
such a calamity? When Ehrlich predicted that England would not exist in the year 2000, what steps should the British Parliament
have taken in 1970 to prevent such a dire outcome? In 1939, when the U.S. Department of the Interior warned that
we only had oil supplies for another 13 years, what actions should President Roosevelt have taken? Finally, what makes
us think that environmental alarmism is any more correct now that they have switched their tune to manmade global warming?
Here are a few facts: Over 95 percent of the greenhouse effect is the result of water vapor in Earth's atmosphere.
Without the greenhouse effect, Earth's average temperature would be zero degrees Fahrenheit. Most climate change
is a result of the orbital eccentricities of Earth and variations in the sun's output. On top of that, natural wetlands
produce more greenhouse gas contributions annually than all human sources combined.
[FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']Dr. Williams serves on the faculty of George Mason University as John M. Olin Distinguished Professor of Economics [/FONT][FONT='Calibri','sans-serif']and is the author of More Liberty Means Less Government: Our Founders Knew This Well.[/FONT]
 

Jony82

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Any time you want to hand out car wash advice Bill, I'll listen. But I don't go to an auto mechanic to get my appendix removed and I sure as hell won't take scientific advice from a car wash operator or an economist.
 

ted mcmeekin

Fast and Clean
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
412
Reaction score
1
Points
16
I did not see any advice here--just quotes of gore's and other's heros--nothing wrong with being held accountable for what you say. Ted

Good post Bill--this should keep Doug at his keyboard for weeks.
 

ted mcmeekin

Fast and Clean
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
412
Reaction score
1
Points
16
PS and if you were looking for advice--you may want to strike all these nuts from your references.
 

Ben's Car Wash

Conveyor & self service
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
608
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Zephyrhills, Florida
First, Bill it is proper to post a link to the story of article to prove it's autentisity.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/walter-williams/environmentalists-wild-predictions.html

Second. The US DID RUN OUT OF OIL which eventually led to the OPEC oil embargo of the 1970's and had we taken steps we would have been better prepared.

Now for Global warming deniers: That meeting a month or so back included a list of DEAD PEOPLE, people who never agreed to be on the list and "scientist" who do not deny Global warming. The "offical US position" is that GLOBAL WARMING IS REAL AND MAN HAS CONTRIBUTED mostly to it's causes by fossil fuels.

But the article doesn't go into the advances in the last decade or two in satilites, ice core samples and years of data that was not previously recorded. For example when Global cooling was predicted, no weather patterns were availble via satilites. We now have 30 more years of this.

Global Flooding, changes in weather patterns are happening. 100,000 people in Burma are dead or missing as a result of huge storms. Massive food shortage are happening because WE THE US ARE PLANTING CROPPS NOT FOR FOOD BUT FOR FUEL and driving up commodities. This is a reality of a changing planet and a global economy with blaming people of a party like you global deniers do every post about this.
 

Jony82

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Points
6
I did not see any advice here--just quotes of gore's and other's heros--nothing wrong with being held accountable for what you say. Ted

Good post Bill--this should keep Doug at his keyboard for weeks.
Advice, education, whatever you want to call it. One-sided info from an economist on a scientific topic is not worth posting on a car wash board.

I'm sure glad I got an education in science as to not be brain-washed by big oil.
 

Bubbles Galore

Active member
Joined
Apr 11, 2008
Messages
2,115
Reaction score
0
Points
36
Location
Michigan
No matter what your stance is on this subject, I believe that as a civilized society, we need to take steps to conserve natural resources and be conscious of the impact we have on the environment.

I don't think the government should step in and try to regulate our 'impact' because it appears to me that this will just be another excuse to begin taxing us as we go about our daily lives. Democrat/Republican - Liberal/Conservative, it always seem like they have some great idea to try and redistribute my hard earned money. I think they need to reward us for being more conservative rather than taxing us into submission. Haven't they ever heard of positive reinforcement?
 

Doug P.

Member
Joined
Sep 4, 2007
Messages
136
Reaction score
17
Points
18
I enjoyed the article Bill, thanks for posting a copy of it. There was a very interesting article in the Wall Street Journal a week or two ago that cast some serious doubt about whether global warming is actually occuring and even if it is whether human activity has had an impact on it.

I will be the first to admit that it is possible that human activity has altered the climate to some degree. I also believe it is possible that human activity has had no measurable effect on the climate. I find it interesting that so many of these people who believe the end is near because of global warming refuse to admit that there is even the slightest chance that they may be wrong, and anyone who dares to disagree is a fool. Of course it is idiotic to listen to an economist observations about a scientific matter but it makes perfect sense to listen to a politicians(Gore) view about a scientific matter.

Doug P.
 

pitzerwm

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
3,693
Reaction score
10
Points
36
Location
Tri-Cities, WA
Personally, I think that some people from the middle east will blow up the planet, before, Gore is proven right or wrong. If you have been listening to some of the preachers that have been spouting off about God's justice being the reason for Katrina, and 911, I'd also start being worried about them and who's side they support.
 

Jony82

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Doomsday prophecies should never be taken seriously. There are radical scientists that say global warming will destroy the earth the same way radical computer programmers predicted Y2K was the end and radical christian groups predicting the rapture and the coming of the anti-christ.

It is unfair to link radical scientists who believe in this to the entire scientific community the same way it is unfair to link radical christian groups together with other christian groups.

It's my pet-peeve that respectable science gets thrown under the bus because of these quacks and they and their global warming research all gets bundled into the same doomsday bull by conservatives.

Another pet-peeve is economists, car wash operators, Rush Limbaugh and other uninformed people seem to think they are suddenly armed with a wealth of scientific knowledge and immediately renounce respectable research without doing any of their own. Let's face it: Without science and scientists, we would all be living on a farm raising potatos with a life span of 50 years if we were lucky. It is extremely unfair and ignorant to dismiss this group of individuals as a whole as quacks when your entire life would be different without this field of study. How easy it is to accept the benefits of science when is doesn't disagree with your political party. The minute it crosses a line and becomes a political issue a number of uninformed and uneducated people on the subject suddenly seem to know more than the experts.

If you want to know how to wash your car, talk to a car wash operator.
If you want to know how to fix your car, talk to an auto mechanic.
If you want your cancer treated, go to a doctor.
If you want to know about global warming, talk to someone who has researched it. Stop getting your info from talk show hosts and economists.
 

ted mcmeekin

Fast and Clean
Joined
Aug 30, 2007
Messages
412
Reaction score
1
Points
16
Soundl like you would agree Al Gore is not an expert, has no formal scientific education as we do and we should ignore his ranting. I am glad we found some common ground.

Ted
 

Jony82

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Points
6
So long as you ignore Limbaughs, O'Reilly's and all your other cronies - yes.
 

pitzerwm

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
3,693
Reaction score
10
Points
36
Location
Tri-Cities, WA
Jony82, you must live too near to Doug. No one is doing any of the above. It is an article with another view. Pointing out that in the past there have been people predicting the end of the world. Some people believed them and some didn't, just like some people believed Jim Jones and drank the Kool aid. Until it happens it isn't a fact. Its just like the people that believe in heaven and hell, since no one has come back and confirmed it, you believe it because you have faith, that's it simple faith. Same thing with Global warming and the ice age, more than likely none of us will be around when one or the other happens. Sure I think that you should not waste resources, covet your neighbor's wife, or release freon into the atmosphere, but I'm not going to start riding a bicycle, or walking because Al Gore, says so. Especially, when he pays someone else to do it so he can go on living the good life. If I can afford, $5 a gallon for gas in my car, I'll be driving it.
 

jcedwards

lurker
Joined
Jan 22, 2008
Messages
36
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Global warming has become a religious cause for many as Jony82 has pointed out. These are the people that find purpose in their life by adopting causes with theoretical faults due to mankind or a privileged group. It is through this public espousing of this belief they curry favor in the eyes of their friends and family, and society as a whole. The sad reality it that many have no other purpose in life besides taking on these unoriginal causes like parasites.

There is data everywhere to indicate warming and there is data everywhere to indicate cooling or lack of warming. EVERYONE that reports has a dog in the fight. Scientists have grants, egos, and peer pressure to motivate them - they are not saints by any means. And of course, the evil businessman seeks to exploit the earth to his own selfish gain and at the expense of others - another old, tired story line.

It seems to all boil down to (good choice of words) to whom you will believe? One side uses this 'crisis' as a means to control everyones lives and only sells a bleak future. The other side advocates no change or control of people's lives. I think I may put my money on the folks that do not see a doomed future of being straight jacketed as we eventually skid to our grave. Americans have historically believed in a better tomorrow and have worked towards that goal. Sellers of death and despair have never prospered other than amongst their own self-hating groups. The global warming advocates better find a happy ending or there will not be much of an audience for their cocktail party cause.

BTW, no one knows if the earth is heating or cooling, or if this heating or cooling is bad, or if this has been caused by man, or if man can ever reverse it regardless of his involvement in the cause. It is all just a theory. Some choose to believe the theory of Creation and some choose to believe the theory of Evolution. Who has been able to prove the truth of either to the other side?
 

Ben's Car Wash

Conveyor & self service
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
608
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Zephyrhills, Florida
Personally, I think that some people from the middle east will blow up the planet, before, Gore is proven right or wrong. If you have been listening to some of the preachers that have been spouting off about God's justice being the reason for Katrina, and 911, I'd also start being worried about them and who's side they support.
Wait.... Bill THE ONLY PEOPLE ON EARTH TO EVER US A NUKE ON OTHER HUMANS WAS THE US! And your worried about the Middle East? What about DETERANT?

And FOR THE RECORD... AL GORE never said he invented the internet! He put forth the freaking legislation that allowed ALL OF US HERE INCLUDING BILL WHO PROFITS FROM IT to use what was a military project. So he didn't invent it... he let us get ACESS TO IT.... Sometimes you guys have $hit for brains!
 

Ben's Car Wash

Conveyor & self service
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
608
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Zephyrhills, Florida
And yes I really meant that! How can you guys think for a moment that 50% of American's who voted for Gore somehow won't get offended at times when you slam him on every chance you get? Most especially when you make money off of what he did? You sure as hell have no problem collecting the cash for his venture in letting you acces the internet or creating a business, or enjoying the benifit of not paying taxes on items purchased over the web? But you freaking bicker like 11 year old middle school girls over the prettiest girl with pigtails who gets all the boys!

Sorry.... but THE OFFICIAL US GOVENRMENT STANCE IS THAT GLOBAL WARMING IS MAN INDUCED BY THE BURNING OF HYDROCARBONS. That global temperature HAVE INCREASED in the past 30-40 years. That sea level have risen AS A RESULT OF OUR HUMAN ACTIVITY!

Now is that NATURAL? To me as natural as a bee hive growing too big and dying off yes. We are consuming too much and being too sucessful as a species and will create the conditions for a huge die off.... THAT IS NATURAL. But we can limit it. Again 30-40 years ago we didn't have weather sats. We did not have the body of knowledge. Gallio, DeVinchi, Capunicus all we tried for crimes by the Catholic Church for their view on "science". I guess we're heading back to those times?
 

Ben's Car Wash

Conveyor & self service
Joined
Aug 31, 2007
Messages
608
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Location
Zephyrhills, Florida
http://thinkprogress.org/wonkroom/2008/05/09/right-wing-gore-cyclone/

One week ago, Tropical Cyclone Nargis struck Burma, tracing an unprecedented path of devastation across this poor nation of 55 million, called Myanmar by its military dictatorship. On May 6, Jeff Poor wrote for the Business & Media Institute (BMI) a story entitled, “Al Gore Calls Myanmar Cyclone a ‘Consequence’ of Global Warming,” which was subsequently linked on the Drudge Report. Poor claims:

{Using tragedy to advance an agenda has been a strategy for many global warming activists, and it was just a matter of time before someone found a way to tie the recent Myanmar cyclone to global warming.}
 

Jony82

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
68
Reaction score
0
Points
6
Jony82, you must live too near to Doug. QUOTE]

But Bill, it is happening. Will it lead to the destruction of the world? No.

My problem with the anti-global warming crowd is their refusal to do any research of their own before denouncing the research of others. Plus, their linking the FACT of global warming to doomsday theories and dismissing the research as a whole based on a few outlandish predictions. They are not one in the same.

Global warming will not destroy the earth. Global warming will simply result in a change in the pattern of weather. Jet streams and ocean currents will change, bringing on a different weather pattern for different areas. This doesn't mean we'll be growing corn in December here in Iowa. It simply means that the normal, predictable weather pattern will be altered.

The United States will be largely unaffected due to it's wealth and power. The poor, 3rd world and overpopulated countries will be the most affected.

There is no end in sight for the human race or America due to global warming. Any theories predicting such should be dismissed, as should any naysayers who can't show ANY evidence that this current global warming pattern is natural.

It's also important to remember that the earth doesn't naturally warm or cool. There is ALWAYS a cause for everything. Ice ages had a cause, periods of extraordinary warmth had a cause. This current warming trend likewise has a cause.

Show me the research that has been done to explain this warming trend is linked to a NATURAL cause.
 
Top