Monday, August 22, 2005
Send McCain to the UN!
If John McCain is so concerned about Global Warming (GW), then why can’t we switch him out for Bolton at the UN? According to NewsMax.com, McCain recently said while touring Barrow, AK, ‘Anyone doubting the effects of human activity on global climate change should talk to the people of Alaska and the Yukon’ ‘We are convinced that the overwhelming scientific evidence indicated that climate change is taking place and human activities play a very large role,' he added. http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/8/18/170307.shtml
I thought McCain was from Arizona. It’s hot there all the time. So what’s a few degrees more if GW exists? Wait a minute. GW does not exist. There is absolutely no scientific data to support GW. Last time I posted about GW there was no conclusive evidence for global warming because there was no conclusive evidence. Did McCain and Hillary conjure up a séance with Carl Sagan after some peyote and whale blubber in AK to arrive at this astonishing finding that GW is now fact? Now, to my pedestrian knowledge about GW, when most of the assertions about GW were made, there have been no reliable records taken over time in such places other than mostly populated areas. How many weather stations are in the Soviet Union? How about the Falklands? The earth is massive and instruments can’t be made to cover every bit in order to record accurate and discernable data. From what I have read, the only way to get data about the temperature of the earth is from satellites, right? And what has been the conclusion or data generated to support the premise of GW from satellites? Nothing. Now this is the argument that really irritates the GW loonies - You have to have a baseline in order to measure against it, right? Since when has that baseline of the earth’s temperature been established? With what data? What conclusions? What corroborations? So if you have no baseline, how can you measure a deviation from that baseline to claim GW exists? And how did McCain and Hillary get so smart about GW? Is it because, as this article says, that McCain is sponsoring a bill about greenhouse gas emissions? Seems like a great post hoc fallacy – if I see an iceberg break, that must mean that there are too many SUVs and Soccer Moms in the US! I remember what Rush said about the animal rights wackos back in the 80s. He said that people tend to think about the existence and extinction of animals in human terms, in terms of the lifespan of humans and not how long the earth has existed. Same thing applies to GW. Has the temperature that we have today always been around? I don’t know. And neither do scientists since no one was around to take readings when dinosaurs walked among us (or when Adam and Eve were in Eden for all my Creationist readers). All I know is that as much as I respect McCain for spending five years in hell in Hanoi, I can’t abide his ‘say anything’ to get noticed for crappy legislation that will hurt the US economy if anymore restrictions are put on US business’ ability to operate at a profit in the global marketplace. Can we please send McCain to the UN? They love this GW crap there!
I thought McCain was from Arizona. It’s hot there all the time. So what’s a few degrees more if GW exists? Wait a minute. GW does not exist. There is absolutely no scientific data to support GW. Last time I posted about GW there was no conclusive evidence for global warming because there was no conclusive evidence. Did McCain and Hillary conjure up a séance with Carl Sagan after some peyote and whale blubber in AK to arrive at this astonishing finding that GW is now fact? Now, to my pedestrian knowledge about GW, when most of the assertions about GW were made, there have been no reliable records taken over time in such places other than mostly populated areas. How many weather stations are in the Soviet Union? How about the Falklands? The earth is massive and instruments can’t be made to cover every bit in order to record accurate and discernable data. From what I have read, the only way to get data about the temperature of the earth is from satellites, right? And what has been the conclusion or data generated to support the premise of GW from satellites? Nothing. Now this is the argument that really irritates the GW loonies - You have to have a baseline in order to measure against it, right? Since when has that baseline of the earth’s temperature been established? With what data? What conclusions? What corroborations? So if you have no baseline, how can you measure a deviation from that baseline to claim GW exists? And how did McCain and Hillary get so smart about GW? Is it because, as this article says, that McCain is sponsoring a bill about greenhouse gas emissions? Seems like a great post hoc fallacy – if I see an iceberg break, that must mean that there are too many SUVs and Soccer Moms in the US! I remember what Rush said about the animal rights wackos back in the 80s. He said that people tend to think about the existence and extinction of animals in human terms, in terms of the lifespan of humans and not how long the earth has existed. Same thing applies to GW. Has the temperature that we have today always been around? I don’t know. And neither do scientists since no one was around to take readings when dinosaurs walked among us (or when Adam and Eve were in Eden for all my Creationist readers). All I know is that as much as I respect McCain for spending five years in hell in Hanoi, I can’t abide his ‘say anything’ to get noticed for crappy legislation that will hurt the US economy if anymore restrictions are put on US business’ ability to operate at a profit in the global marketplace. Can we please send McCain to the UN? They love this GW crap there!
<< Home
