Weekend Rambler
Hmmm, well, the Barnyard just learned from Chris Matthews' show that Al Gore is a major hedge fund manager in the stock market. That of course begs the question of whether his piece of science fiction documentary "An Inconvenient Truth"is nothing more than a super hyped infomercial for companies he has major holdings in? Al Gore may be a lunatic but he is far from stupid and as we have stated before this whole thing is about power and money not the environment.
There is much blather about computer models and their dire predictions well any computer model is only as good as the data fed into it, if the data is incomplete or flawed the model can be drastically skewed. Only recently was man able to design a computer able to beat a man at chess and its millions of variables are well documented. There are so many billions more times more variables in the earth sciences that prediction on that scale is impossible especially by simple computer models built on limited data input.
So lets assume we warm a few degrees at the northern and southern latitudes, that would mean extended growing seasons throughout those regions and previously unavailable cropland made available thus more food, higher CO2 levels contribute to vibrant flora and thus a healthy fauna with ample food and higher levels of oxygen because of the increased flora. Dang, that sounds good to the Goat, much better than an iceage at any rate, it seems life flourishes during our warm periods in history and suffers during the cold, well who'da thunk it? Does Al Gore prefer an iceage environment like other blubber encased creatures where the predatory strong prey on the weak?
A quick mention on ethanol, we get about 250 gallons of fuel per acre of corn, do the math, and it takes about half of what is produced to produce the other half so double that acreage. How many acres would it take to fuel your car on ethanol for a month? Get the picture, it is a pipe dream that will drastically drive up the price of food basics for the world's poor as starch, corn, rice, grain etc gets converted to fuel not food. Dang that cost vs. price thing always gets in the way of pipe dreams doesn't it. At least global warming would allow those crops to be grown in a larger region, how ironic is that?
Hey this Goat loves to dine on clean veggies and game, breath clean air and drink clean water from mountain streams, the last folks he wants in control of that are the neo-socialist greenies of which he is a former member and avid supporter of.
Conservation and survival is about freedom, freedom to overcome obstacles, freedom to maintain your own land, freedom to create new and profitable alternatives, not government mandates, taxation, and social engineering. This Goat is tired of beaurocrats talking about something they don't do, when was the last time Nancy Pelosi or Barbara Boxer hauled a backpack full of toilet paper and beer cans out of the backcountry of the high Sierra? How many truckloads of soiled diapers, beer cans and assorted garbage have they helped remove from our waterways on their own time with their own vehicles?
The Goat doesn't need just hipboots to get through the liberal duplicity, he needs a spacesuit.
4 comments:
First, I like the fact that Al Gore is attacked as insincere, without reference to anything at all, but others actually take positions based upon integrity. Second, since we have now lost an entire populated island chain - part of the Federated States of Micronesia had to be relocated - because their islands were overwhelmed by rising ocean levels, one might think there just might be something to this whole global warming business.
Finally, survival is exactly what Gore is talking about - how do we keep a sustainable soceity when we have to relocate entire populations due to rising ocean levels, disappearing farm land, altered ecospheres? It is the problem of "the greens" all over again - how do we maintain common property, and even private property, when all are threatened equally? The question of the source of global climate change is important, but we have to both come to grips with the reality we face now, as well as wrestle with the source of the problem (for the record, I believe it is beyond doubt that human industrial activity, and the internal combustion engine are at the root of the problem; consider this - we have spewed quite literally billions of tons of greenhouse gases, toxic effluence, and compounds that, when chemically bonded to water vapor turn to acid in to the atmosphere. We continue to do it, even I do it; there has to be some kind of reaction to this already changed atmospheric condition, as the Earth's ecosystem is a living, breathing system).
That island chain suffered from coastal erosion due to overdevelpoement on its coast not rising sea levels since the sea levels have not risen. In fact they just elected a new PM and are looking for international investment to build resorts. I suggest that before you accuse somebody of playing loose with the facts that you get yours in place first.
Should we strive to be clean, sure, but we can also be smart and carefull so our actions aren't over-reactions that damage the US economy thus hurting working class Americans. I thought the Left was all for working class folks, these proposals like Kyoto would only hurt the working class and not effect the elite in anyway.
The idea that our economic viability should take precedence over the health of the planet is a strange one, espcially if our economic viability ends up being impossible in a drastically altered climate. "Overdevelopment" is a nice way to ignore the fact that the newly elected PM had Micronesia's rep at the UN demand action by industrial states on global warming and rising ocean levels. Apparently it is easy to blame a victim half way across the globe.
The argument that, even if global climate change is true, even if we human beings are to blame for it, we must avoid doing anything because the necessary steps would be too wrenching for our economy to be both short sided and disingenuous. Since it is an argument put forth by those who somehow do not accept the reality around them - climate change is going on all around us, and the results are hardly beneficial to our current industrial states - I often wonder if this is not a fall-back argument once all the non-quibbling over the scientific data is over. The last desperate plea for clemency from nature, as it were. Hardly inspiring.
Yep our climate has been in constant flux for millions of years of which industrial man has occupied a brief couple hundred years. To suggest that us insignificant fleas in this universe can effect the climate is perverse, if we shut down every single source of human based carbon emissions it would have negligable measurable impact. If you search down a few pages I linked a handfull of articles on the subject. Has the earth warmed since our last iceage just 10,000 years ago, yep and that is a good thing. Is pollution bad, of course, and we have seen massive gains just in our lifetimes and we are about the same age. Our population has doubled and our skies and water are far cleaner than just 30 years ago.America leads in clean technology because there is a demand for it not because of socialistic mandates and misguided treaties. So Al Gore is set to make millions off his over-heated retoric, there is nothing wrong with that, its the American way, that fact should be disclosed by him that he owns major stock in companies that benefit from his retoric.
Post a Comment