Friday, July 28, 2006
The problem with the left grabbing an issue is that they take a term and attach all sorts of things to it. So--for example--"global warming" means that "man has caused global warming" and "we (the government, preferably us) must take drastic measures to 'fix' global warming". Well, ok, it appears the globe is getting warmer, although some scientists have pointed out that many of the observation stations have had city grow up around them, which tends to cause localized hot spots. And I haven't seen a wholly mammoth in quite a while (not counting "Ice Age 2").
But that kind of points out the problem. Somehow, I don't think SUVs, or even humans, were responsible for the end of the Ice Age. And it appears that we actually have less CO2 in the air than when everyone was burning wood, coal, and other nasty stuff. And the temperature on Mars is increasing, too. Does that mean that there are martians causing their global warming?
I think the jury is still very much out on how much of the warming humans are causing, and how much we could slow or reverse it, even if we all stopped producing CO2, or-as some of the more radical have suggested-- 90% of us died off, or were killed by disease. (To which I reply, "You first!" Isn't it interesting that the ones that advocate killing people to reduce the population always mean "not them"? Because, of course, they are the "elite", better than eveyrone else. You wonder if they have pictures of mass murderers and despots--or maybe Mengele--on their walls. And the scary thing is, they are heroes within the scientific community, and not even considered that radical! Pretty scary when you think about it. Access to genetics, and no morals, or worse, twisted morals. But I digress...)
Anyway, as I said, the left says "global warming", and they mean all this other stuff, but when you try to address that issue, they go to the "you can't deny global warming, or you're an anti-intellectual, and then we don't have to listen to you" ("la la la la la, I can't hear you"). And "anti-intellectual" is the least of what you'll be called! They are very good at epithets.
Oh well, that's my philisophical/political rant for the day!
But that kind of points out the problem. Somehow, I don't think SUVs, or even humans, were responsible for the end of the Ice Age. And it appears that we actually have less CO2 in the air than when everyone was burning wood, coal, and other nasty stuff. And the temperature on Mars is increasing, too. Does that mean that there are martians causing their global warming?
I think the jury is still very much out on how much of the warming humans are causing, and how much we could slow or reverse it, even if we all stopped producing CO2, or-as some of the more radical have suggested-- 90% of us died off, or were killed by disease. (To which I reply, "You first!" Isn't it interesting that the ones that advocate killing people to reduce the population always mean "not them"? Because, of course, they are the "elite", better than eveyrone else. You wonder if they have pictures of mass murderers and despots--or maybe Mengele--on their walls. And the scary thing is, they are heroes within the scientific community, and not even considered that radical! Pretty scary when you think about it. Access to genetics, and no morals, or worse, twisted morals. But I digress...)
Anyway, as I said, the left says "global warming", and they mean all this other stuff, but when you try to address that issue, they go to the "you can't deny global warming, or you're an anti-intellectual, and then we don't have to listen to you" ("la la la la la, I can't hear you"). And "anti-intellectual" is the least of what you'll be called! They are very good at epithets.
Oh well, that's my philisophical/political rant for the day!
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
