This site keeps daily tabs on some articulate articles for both sides of the global warming debate. Interesting read.
Posted by tgl on 2008-02-13 17:45:51 +0000
Any site that claims there is a "debate" to climate change is silly. Just like the "debate" around evolution. These "debates" are political, not scientific.
The debate should be around what we should be doing, not shouting that "jan' 2008 was _really_ cold!", or, "25 hurricanes last year!" There are pros and cons to action or in-action, but the science is real and it indicates anthropogenic global warming.
What should we do? Nothing? That's a valid position. Why?
Posted by ConorClockwise on 2008-02-13 21:54:14 +0000
While I'm not as adamant as tgl appears to be, I do believe that the science vastly outweighs the guesses that we're just in a huge centuries long thermal upbeat.
I love how the first article in the "Dissenting voices" doesn't dissent with global warming. It simply states it was a lot colder in January '08 than '07. A lot of "dissention" appears to be this way; just specific glimpses that counter the trend.
Posted by pchippy on 2008-02-14 10:34:33 +0000
Yes, there's a really amusing website out there run by a guy who's convinced (or claims to be) that a new ice age is beginning. He updates his site with cherry-picked headlines along the lines of "Four Feet of Snow Fall in Dallas" or "New Zealand Experiencing Coldest Summer in Years."
The most amusing piece of evidence he came forward with was an article noting that new glaciers have formed on Mt. Saint Helens in the last 25 years--which, taken as a piece of evidence against global warming, is either disingenuous or else very ignorant of geophysics.
Posted by ConorClockwise on 2008-02-14 10:39:31 +0000
I think I remember a Drudge link to this guy, when he talked about the "growing" glaciers in Rocky Mountain Canada. The glaciers were indeed covering more area, but he forgot to mention it was because the glaciers had slid into pieces and shrank in volume.