Thursday, July 06, 2006

Fair and Balanced?

Every day we get more serious warnings from more scientific researchers. It's not fair and balanced to give equal time to a point of view supported by less than one percent of scientists while giving scant coverage to the findings of the other 99%.

Here are the comments on the republican candidates for Tennessee State Senator:

Ex-Mayor Bob Corker: "You know, there are a body of scientists who think what the questioner said is true, there is a body of scientists who think that's not the case. It's just part of the changes that are taking place."



Ex-Congressman Van Hilleary: "Well, I heard Al Gore say the other night that the debate was over, but I'm not sure that he convinced me. He hadn't convinced me a whole lot over the years."



Ex-Congressman Ed Bryant: "I'm not saying that we have to do away with gasoline powered cars, we're going to have to drill where we have to drill, we have to build more refineries out there."


Feeling safer now?...Here's the latest science:

Carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels could overload the seas, researchers say in a new report designed to document what's known about the problem. The report echoes earlier warnings from individual scientists.


“It is clear that seawater chemistry will change in coming decades and centuries in ways that will dramatically alter marine life,” said Joan Kleypas, the report’s lead author and a scientist at the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) in Boulder, Colorado. “But we are only beginning to understand the complex interactions between large-scale chemistry changes and marine ecology. It is vital to develop research strategies to better understand the long-term vulnerabilities of sensitive marine organisms to these changes.”


Live Science

OK, I'm actually exaggerating...I apologize. Far less than 1% of scientists think man is NOT having an effect on climate change. Wouldn't the "Conservative" thing to do be to reduce our effect on atmospheric carbon just in case the vast majority of scientists might accidentally be right?

Here's what Harold Ford says:

"It does not matter that the ideas are Democratic or Republican, only that they are good ideas."


"...Good ideas are based on facts, not narrow ideology. Pretending the world's climate isn't changing is like pretending the world is flat, or that men didn't walk on the moon. You can pretend all you like, but it doesn't make it so...

Our climate is changing. The National Academy of Sciences, comprised of our nation's leading scientists, has said so repeatedly. As the National Academy plainly said, "Greenhouse gases are accumulating in Earth's atmosphere as a result of human activities. Human-induced warming and associated sea level rises are expected to continue through the 21st century."

"...Our opponents, nevertheless, all have embraced ideological extremism over settled science, declaring that global climate change is not occurring, and offering no solutions. This is precisely what keeps the nation from moving forward and solving problems..."




Courage,

Steve

3 comments:

  1. Charlie Mead10:01 AM

    Steve,
    O.K. Global Warming is real. There is real science to back up this conclusion. Only the "brain-dead" refute this phenomenon.

    The solution is the problem. The idea of limiting the use of their SUV's or turning down the air concitioners is not selling well.

    I am wondering why we don't take a more direct approach - like removing the CO2 from the atmosphere. We know how to do that. Simply compress the atmospheric gases until the CO2 solidifies (dry ice), store this dry ice in abandoned salt mines which could be refrigerated to maintain the CO2 in its solid state.

    This process would take some energy but we know how to produce that in an efficient and clean manner (nuclear).

    This approach might just "sell" on the political scene. It would definitely create some jobs.

    Charlie Mead

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous7:34 PM

    Why don't we develop a "plant-mimicking" device that uses CO2 (and sunlight) as an energy source and find ways to utilize the compound in more productive ways. This great abundance of CO2 we are "creating" could be a major untapped resource for humanity.

    Don't get me wrong, I think the destruction of the Earth is horrible, but maybe we should look at some of the potential good things that could come as a result of this climate change***It is not all going to be death and destruction***

    Anyone interested in seeing how global warming can actually be a GOOD thing, check this site out:
    http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2006/06/warmer_weather_could_speed_up.php

    Maybe we should start thinking a little more outside the box. When confronted with the global warming issue, most people ask "How is it going to affect ME, what kind of inconveniences will 'I' have to deal with?"

    ReplyDelete
  3. re Bob Corker: Never vote for a man who does a TV commercial with his Mama. Period.

    ReplyDelete