The Economist Comes Around on Climate Change

_{Barry Arrington

April 15, 2013

Intelligent Design}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

As predicted in these pages, The whole global warming house of cards really is starting to collapse.

Comments

OT: Uncomfortably funny: Every Day is Earth Day in North Korea.Chance Ratcliff_{April 22, 2013
April
04
Apr
22
22
2013
05:57 PM
5
05
57
PM
PDT}

With all the (unarguably anthropogenic) deforestation, increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere could be a boon.
I believe the forested area of the world is increasing or becoming more dense and one of the attributed reasons is the increase of CO2 which is the main food for plant life. http://www.naturalnews.com/032884_forest_density_CO2.htmljerry_{April 17, 2013
April
04
Apr
17
17
2013
07:48 AM
7
07
48
AM
PDT}

I am definitely against polluting drinking water and releasing toxic gases into the air. On the other hand, I have difficulty labeling the key gas for photosynthesis a pollutant. With all the (unarguably anthropogenic) deforestation, increased CO2 levels in the atmosphere could be a boon. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if we discovered that some of the rise in CO2 is the result of self-regulation built into the earth and its cycles.Phinehas_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
03:36 PM
3
03
36
PM
PDT}

Reducing a complex system such as the earth to a single temperature figure is bound to miss the point. Are we altering our environment in multiple and unpredictable ways with possibly irreversible consequences is the point. Trillions of gallons of toxic waste pumped underground, the oceans cluttered up with islands of plastic, drinking water polluted with farm and waste chemicals and pharmaceuticals, the soil saturated with pesticides and herbicides and animals pumped up with pharmaceuticals all finding their way to the food chain. The consequences of these actions for this intelligently designed planet are potentially grim and cannot be captured in simple figures.vanodorf_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
01:42 PM
1
01
42
PM
PDT}

A real-life cabbie joke I read when the pope was visiting New York, was this remark made by a NY cabbie to his passenger, when they were caught in the heavy traffic due to the pope's visit: 'This guy must have connections....'Axel_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
10:00 AM
10
10
00
AM
PDT}

Do you think there are no plausible grounds for resorting to the precautionary principle, Joe? Someone else who agrees with you and the others here, and should in all other regards, at least, be a UD icon, is Freemen Dyson. http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/indepth/2013/mar/21/an-iconoclasts-careerAxel_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
09:57 AM
9
09
57
AM
PDT}

The article was making a big thing of the fact that jornalists are doubting climate change.
There are plenty of scientists who already doubt it. The significance of this is that now journalists are not just blind followers of other scientists. Which means they are not going to print unsubstantiated nonsense.Joe_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
03:43 AM
3
03
43
AM
PDT}

If you look back over the global average temperatures since 1900 you can see many reversals and pauses in the overall long term trend. The current pause in warming has not changed the overall trend. As stewards of God's world we need to take precautionary action now.aarceng_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
02:54 AM
2
02
54
AM
PDT}

Cab Driver Goes to Heaven http://www.jokes.com/funny-dark-humor/w45kf0/cab-driver-goes-to-heavenbornagain77_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
01:58 AM
1
01
58
AM
PDT}

The article was making a big thing of the fact that jornalists are doubting climate change. Journalists ? How about taxi drivers ? Then Im convinced.Graham2_{April 16, 2013
April
04
Apr
16
16
2013
01:28 AM
1
01
28
AM
PDT}

Climate change was always unlikely from mans actions. The point here is however who cares what the media says. If its useful to overthrow a error then fine but if these mags agreed with global warming it wouldn't make it true. We must watch the math here. The media has no credibility because for so long now its been striving to say it knows better then everyone else. People only know what they know. Journalists are just writers and not deciders of truth. The public trusts they get the best info but really the journalists decide what is true and use info as it suits them. Then finally they just are not that smart about anything other then getting audiences or news info. Don't need their thumbs up for dissent on global warming. it at best means their side is crumbling bad. I predict in 15 years the media will agree evolutionary biology has lost its place as a theory or even a viable hypothesis.Robert Byers_{April 15, 2013
April
04
Apr
15
15
2013
02:13 PM
2
02
13
PM
PDT}

"Should We Worry About the Earth’s Calculated Warming at 0.7 degrees C Over Last the Last 100 Years When the Observed Daily Variations Over the Last 161 Years Can Be as High as 24 degrees C?"- from HereJoe_{April 15, 2013
April
04
Apr
15
15
2013
02:11 PM
2
02
11
PM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply