April 24th, 2007, 04:51 PM #1
Another global warming skeptic weighs in
This letter was published in the Arkansas Democrat Gazette on April 16:You may have noticed that March of this year was particularly hot. As a matter of fact, I understand that it was the hottest March since the beginning of the last century. All of the trees were fully leafed out and legions of bugs and snakes were crawling around during a time in Arkansas when, on a normal year, we might see a snowflake or two. This should come as no surprise to any reasonable person. As you know, Daylight Saving Time started almost a month early this year. You would think that members of Congress would have considered the warming effect that an extra hour of daylight would have on our climate. Or did they? Perhaps this is another plot by a liberal Congress to make us believe that global warming is a real threat. Perhaps next time there should be serious studies performed before Congress passes laws with such far-reaching effects.
CONNIE M. MESKIMEN / Hot Springs
Last edited by Theophylact; April 24th, 2007 at 04:57 PM.I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. --J.S. Mill
April 24th, 2007, 06:14 PM #2
Connie????? I always thought Epidemic would have a manlier name in real life. I just can't picture a guy named Connie standing in his backyard shooting a mini-van.
April 24th, 2007, 06:24 PM #3
And Theo... I dare you to call Connie and find out if he/she were serious. Sad state of affairs that there is a very distinct possibility the letter was serious.
My hat's off if it wasn't =)
George sums it up nicely.
Part of the problem is that there is no downside for non-scientists making incorrect statements (whether wittingly or unwittingly) about science. The people making the statements are not held accountable in the least.
If a lawyer were to make an idiotic statement about most other things (besides science) in an editorial, they wold probably be taken to task — and perhaps even lose credibility.
This fact tends to make people careful when it comes to publicly commenting about most things with a right and wrong answer (other than science) — knowing that their statements may be scrutinized and that they may be taken to task for making them.
On the other hand, when lawyers and other non-scientists make statements about science that are just as idiotic (and just as false), they are essentially given a pass.
If the idiocy of her statement is pointed out by someone else (in a subsequent letter, for example), most people (who know no science) will either conclude that it is a “she said/he said” situation with no right answer or that it “makes no difference if a lawyer is wrong about science”.
Last edited by Gomer; April 24th, 2007 at 06:27 PM.
April 24th, 2007, 08:29 PM #4
And either she or the newspaper misspelled warming.
The truly terrifying thought here is that this woman may be serious and she votes!You can't fix stupidity.
April 25th, 2007, 12:57 AM #5
April 25th, 2007, 08:32 AM #6You can't fix stupidity.
April 25th, 2007, 11:02 AM #7
Not always easy to tell satire from stupidity. I picked up this letter from a post on Making Light. One of the commenters had this to add:My sister-in-law came back from a holiday in Norway, and told her co-workers at the bank about the midnight sun. "The what?" North of the Arctic Circle in summer, the sun doesn't set, it just dips down towards the horizon at midnight, and then starts back up.
Actual reaction: "If it's not going to set, why does it bother dipping down?"
I have it on good authority that stunned silence is the only possible response.I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. --J.S. Mill
April 25th, 2007, 11:30 AM #8
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- almost Virginia
- Blog Entries
gomer you are quite the little dick ain't cha
This twit may be off base but my analysis is at least based on fact. Fact BTW that you are unable to contest as well.
The reason the graphs I use in my argument may be wrong, there may be other causes but they none the less do not seem to indicate CO2 as the primary cause of global warming... So don't get pissy with me Gomer. I just displayed my opinion of what co2 trailing warming and trailing cooling indicates.
This frustrates you because you have no answer for it. I am sorry to rain on your parade. Perhaps you will someday come up with a logical reason that co2 trailed warming and cooling but at this moment No one has successfully done so.
April 25th, 2007, 11:36 AM #9You can't fix stupidity.
April 25th, 2007, 11:48 AM #10
so is she seriously stupid or is she being funny?
Ohhh she may have been trying to be funny!!"I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend to be one of those deaf-mutes" Or Should I?
Chapter 25, The Catcher in the Rye
April 25th, 2007, 11:53 AM #11
Look, Epidemic, CO2 concentration should lag behind temperature change in a period of warming or cooling brought on by cyclic changes in orbital ellipticity or axial tilt. CO2 is less soluble in warm water than in cold, but the oceans have an enormous thermal mass, and it takes a long time for them to warm up and release their CO2 (or cool down and soak it up). The atmosphere has a far shorter response time because there's so much less of it.
One of the biggest challenges we have now is that the temperature increase caused by anthropogenic CO2 emissions will trigger a delayed further release from the oceans, which will in turn cause a still greater temperature rise -- a positive feedback situation. Even worse, there's a huge amount of methane tied up in gas hydrates at the bottom of the oceans. Those hydrates decompose not much above the freezing point of water, and methane is (as I believe you have pointed out) a far more effective greenhouse gas than CO2.
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it. --J.S. Mill
April 25th, 2007, 11:54 AM #12
O, Wait, she WAS SERIOUS???!
should have read the responses first. I sincerely hope its comedy.
Last edited by no1_vern; April 25th, 2007 at 12:02 PM.They say technology slows down for no one. I know it outruns my wallet. I figure its because my wallet isn't light enough yet.
TechIMO Folding@home Team #111 - Crunching for the cure!
dulce bellum inexpertis
April 25th, 2007, 01:54 PM #13
- Join Date
- Mar 2002
- almost Virginia
- Blog Entries
unless the orbital change was 5000 years long and tremendously lowered temperatures. but then we are saying that the orbital change is responsible for the majority of the temperature change and co2 is limited impact.
April 27th, 2007, 01:38 AM #14
April 27th, 2007, 04:29 PM #15
- Join Date
- Feb 2007
- Hueco Mundo
- Blog Entries
It was snowing here last week and as long as I have lived here it has never snowed in April.You people are you satisfied with this kind of world? I'm not.
April 27th, 2007, 09:28 PM #16
Users Browsing this Thread
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
By GiPilot12 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 20Last Post: April 3rd, 2007, 02:04 AM
By mad1 in forum DebateIMO: Politics, Religion, ControversyReplies: 35Last Post: January 15th, 2007, 01:39 PM
By sixf00t4 in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 9Last Post: November 30th, 2005, 01:49 AM
By Shabow in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 31Last Post: January 25th, 2005, 06:50 PM
By Epidemic in forum IMO CommunityReplies: 0Last Post: November 4th, 2004, 05:05 PM