JWR,
Both M.W.A. and Michael Williamson bring some sanity and reason to
the subject of climate change. Thanks for publishing their letters.
Weather/climate is probably the most complex system on earth. For anyone
to say they can tell with any kind of certainty what the climate on
earth was like millions of years ago is ridiculous and what is the
point. On a very basic level, the one universal truth about the weather/climate
is change, unending change. You could even make the case that change
is a universal physical law. The writers are correct to question the
motives of the climate change promoters. I believe most are socialists,
trying to get more control over our lives thru the politics of climate
change. As in the past, humans will have to adapt to any changes in
the weather/climate. Think about it, has the weather/climate ever been
unchanging, with or without man on the planet? Regards, - Keith
Jim:
I would suggest the www.iceagenow.com site for a balanced view of global
warming. However, I do believe we are heading for climatic upheaval
due to a cyclic pattern- go to www.thehorizonproject.com and order
their DVD for additional info. Many things seem to be converging. [You
can read] my two-cents worth at www.countdownto2070.com
Thank you, - Martin P.
JWR,
There is an awful lot of money being spent by Big Oil to contradict
the global warming research, and in particular their efforts to refute the
recent UN ICPP report. As I read the
21 page Summary for Policy Makers, the report really seemed to
want to avoid speculative consideration of methane feedback loops
or nonlinear warming effects,
i.e.:glaciers sliding into the ocean. My sense is that it was very
conservatively written. Any rise in ocean level has profound implications
for our
way of life and Peak Oil issues since refining in the US is mostly
at sea level. [Some ranting, snipped.] - Bruce F.
JWR Replies: The media hoopla over the UN report has ignored mention that what has been released thusfar is just a 21 page summary. The full 600+ page report won't be released for several months. There is definitely a divergence of opinion within the scientific community on this issue. I think that the jury will be out for quite some time. Draw your own conclusions. In my opinion, what we should take away from all this debate is that as well-prepared individuals, it is prudent to make preparations for both short term weather changes, and if we can afford to do so, for the possibility of longer term climate change. (But again, the degree, the direction, and even the cause of that potential change is still a matter of conjecture and heated debate.) To illustrate my point, let me digress: I had a friend named Richard, who sadly died of leukemia at age 45, a couple of years ago. He was a first class eccentric, but he had a sharp wit and was a lot of fun to be around. Richard was a single man that traveled the world. He made his living as a computer programmer in the States, but he owned both a home on a small island in the Philippines and a condominium in Thailand. (He only worked in the U.S. in alternating six month contract stints to support his "travel habit".) As an adherent of the Art Bell/George Noory school of paranormal conjecture, Richard was convinced that severe climate changes could happen "any time, and maybe even overnight" because of "pole shift." He was so concerned that he had all three of his homes stocked with arctic clothing. (N3B extreme cold weather parkas, insulated boots, Wiggy's Ultima Thule sleeping bags, the whole works.) Objectively, I think that Richard was over-prepared, but in the back of my mind is a small but lingering doubt. What if that ever really happened? What if Richard was right? I suppose that if I ever have a really big budget (read: somebody in Hollywood ever sends me a big fat check for my Pulling Through screenplay), then I might buy a second retreat in Central America, just in case. And I might even stock it with some cold weather gear, in memory of Richard.
