RockStarKevin

what to believe….

Can a polar bear’s happiness really be allowed to impede the future intercourse of mankind and the commerce of distant nations?

Bonus Question: “A ‘Christian Nation’?”

Posted on April 10th, 2008 under QC7 • RSS 2.0 feed • You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed

7 Responses to “what to believe….”

1
Peter:
April 10th, 2008 at 6:37 am
umm. I am not sure why polar bears would be interrupting anybody’s future intercouse, and really I don’t think that I want to know. Sometimes ignorance is bliss.
2
rockstar:
April 10th, 2008 at 6:53 am
very blissful indeed….
3
rockstar:
April 10th, 2008 at 6:54 am
i think i throw out these crazy statements just to make sure you’re still there
4
Peter:
April 10th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Ok, I can resist no longer. This guy is an idiot. Here’s why:

1) The long-term trend of ice melting is not only colloborated by satellite imagery, but also first hand documentation (people visiting and measuring the ice shelves) as well as statistical models (which are of no use by themselves, but help when other means of collecting data are available).

2) The major issue with the loss of polar sea-ice, especially multi-year ice, is that it *could* be a early warning that the land ice (the major amount of ice in the Antarctic) is going to start melting as well. This would mean a rapid increase in sea levels (as much as 20 inches in 70 years - enough to cover almost every major coastal city in the world). While the exact relationship between sea-ice and land-ice melting is not completely understood, the real question is - do we want to risk it when we know one of the major causes of warming?

3) Smart environmentalists (yes there are dumb ones) are looking for ways - and have found many - to both reduce CO2 emissions and increase production at the same time. This should be encouraged, not dismissed based on a guy’s statement from 100 years ago.

4) Polar bear numbers are not increasing (see previous comments on last Friday’s post)

5) Just because there is ice on the south pole does not mean that you can “relocate” an entire species to a habitat that is not anywhere close to there own.

Ok that is enough ranting for now.
5
rockstar:
April 10th, 2008 at 10:00 am
Oh good. I’m glad I’m not the only one who thought moving the polar bears south is an asinine idea.

Do you have any person or website that your trust with Global Warming issues? I’d love to know the side that I’m not exposed to enough.
6
Peter:
April 10th, 2008 at 11:17 am
I like The Pew Center on Global Climate Change the best.

http://www.pewclimate.org/
7
rockstar:
April 10th, 2008 at 11:33 am
BONUS UPDATE: I don’t read the weekly standard often. but I did today. crazy!