I can’t even get away from Global Warming on the weekend. Don’t politicians, scientists, and bureaucrats usually take Saturday off? Anyway, we’ve been swamped with it this morning:
giving us a trifecta of hot stories to discuss.
OK, the first one is actually kind of funny, in a sad clown kind of way. First we find this, “The British experiment used computer projections to plot the global climate from 1920 to 2080 — long enough for the results to be statistically significant.” Sorry Mister Reporter dude, but computer projections can never be statistically significant in proving Global Warming, any more than the number of news stories is evidence of anything except how hard the media is trying to push this down our throats. Second, if we assume the computer model is less biased than the media and is actually correct, where’s the bad news? Don’t y’all only report bad news? Well, it seems that way. In this case, and feel free to correct me on this Brit, I’ve been told that the climate in Britain is pretty dang nice. It would be fantastic if Alaska turned into a giant England. We could squeeze an extra hundred million or so people into the country. Not to mention how much cheaper it would be to get to all the minerals and oil up there.
On to mocking the UN story. It looks like the lab coated UN employees have had to take a step or two back. While they have up graded the language from “likely” to “very likely” that people have caused Global Warming, that’s just a fancy way of saying they still can’t prove it. You’ll also note that had to drop all the “end of the Earth” climate change scare tactics. And, as seems to happen frequently with the liberal press, the story ends with an outrageous lie about President Bush, accusing him of pulling the US out of the Kyoto Treaty. As anyone should know, the US never ratified that treaty as President Clinton didn’t bother to send it to the Senate, thus, Bush couldn’t pull us out since we were never in. While crap reporting like this usually ticks me off to no end, this time, since it helps show the pervasive bias in the media, both generally and about global Warming in particular, I’ll say thanks to Correspondent Doyle for helping to make my case.
Finally, we come to the article about the American Meteorological Society’s annual meeting and the lack of members voicing Global Warming doubts. You’re surprised Mr. Stoddard? I posted a bit about threats to members of this group who don’t bow to the politically correct stance and embrace Global Warming as Devinne Truth. What we should be looking for is honest scientific opinion, not statements made under duress. Of course, in that atmosphere, things might not go the way desired by the liberal press. Can’t have that, now can we?