It was touch and go there for a few years with all the devastation we’ve seen from this huge problem.  I’ll pause here so you can recollect all of the devastation.  All of the family that was lost in this great battle and all of the carnage from huge events resulting from this terrible enemy.

Well the good news is that now it is over.  The battle has been won.  We now know the cause of Global Warming.  It’s happiness.  If we can eliminate happiness around the globe  we can defeat this enemy once and for all.  Think about it.  When we were battling Communism, there was no Global Warming.  When we were at war with the Nazis, there was no Global Warming.  Anytime we think back to those enemies, we think of starving people in ‘COLD’ conditions.  Ah ha, cold.  They were keeping the globe cooled off and we did not know it.  The unintended consequences of our many victories around the world is that we also defeated Global Cooling.  Now if we can just eliminate happiness we can finally defeat this new and greater enemy once and for all.

As you are reading this, governments around the world are looking at ways to limit this underlying threat to the world as we know it.  They are determining, with the help of scientists, how much happiness much be suppressed and who should be allowed to have it.  The possibility of happiness licensing is a distinct possibility. We as good citizens must be prepared for what they decree as the proper level of happiness that can be tolerated in our societies.  Only then can we have a mediocre life that is as long as they will allow and as productive as they need.

To my fellow citizens, keep up the good work but don’t be too happy about it.  The world is counting on you.

I live in the North Western US and winter rain and snow are the norm this time of year. However, this year the story is snow in the mountains around LA. In the West this year we are seeing a wet trend. How long will it last? I don’t claim to know but it makes the Global Warming argument interesting.

You may say that a local weather event doesn’t have any bearing on a Global debate. It is however the proponents of the “Crisis” that will go around pointing out every warm spot and blame Global Warming. At the same time they will ignore low temps or record rainfall. So I thought why not point out some of the weather news that doesn’t fit the Global Warming template. You see, it is known that we can expect a gradual increase in temps over hundreds of years. We have the geological evidence to back up the conclusion that we are coming out of a mini-ice age. What w don’t know is when this trend will stop or if it will stop in the foreseeable future. We don’t know because we don’t understand the whole picture of what changes climate on a Global scale. Instead, the basic premise that the proponents use is to say ‘What if we are the cause and making small changes to our lifestyle could save the planet?’.

I find this argument fascinating. It is a small sacrifice they are saying. Just a small expense or a few activities that are left behind. OK, that is a small price to pay but what are we buying. After this sacrifice the job is done, right? NO, then you just have to sacrifice a little more. Then when that is done, I’m sure you could sacrifice just a little more. It is the Irish family proverb, ‘There is always room for one more’. However, at some point you have given everything way. It is a new application of incremental-ism. By the time you figure out it was a waste of time, it’s too late and the little inconvenience has grown to by a big royal pain in the butt.

The problem with this whole Global Warming argument is that we cause it and that we can stop it. This is not a Hollywood movie. We can’t stop earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or large meteors crushing to Earth. We can’t pick up the planet and move it to a new destination in the Galaxy if our Sun gets too hot or too cool. Using 95 percent of the energy this year that you used last year won’t save the planet. IS it a bad idea to be efficient? No, it save money and resources. That is a good enough reason to do it. If the ideas being touted for being more efficient are so weak that only fear mongering can get them even marginally accepted then they will fall by the wayside. Using bad arguments to sell an idea, no matter how good it is, can tarnish that idea for a long time.

If the planet is doomed because of Global Warming, then it is doomed. If Global Warming will, as a result of natural forces, eventually become Global Cooling then this debate was the real disaster.

Make the world a better place and clean up the litter of bad arguments you run across along the way.

If I were to go by the media reports on the subject, I would think that this winters are different they used to be.  Their not.  It is a normal winter and the last summer was like most any other summer. Weather conditions are so very rarely average.  They are more or less or they are higher or lower in most any way you want to measure conditions on any given day, week, or month.  That’s how we get to an average, by throwing all of these extremes into a pot and averaging them out.

Global Warming, where have you been all my life.  At this rate, we’ll still be having cold winters for the rest of my life.  Bummer, and I was hoping for some tanning weather this winter.  Oh well, guess I’ll just have to bundle up and wait it out.

In this case, it is the increase in the size and severity of wild fires in the West.  Well, there are some interesting facts (oops, I used the f word) that are ignored (with great effort by the diligent media) in these Climate discussions. 

• Population Distribution
• Logging Practices
• Forest Management Changes

The media are all a dither about anything they can link to Global Warming or Climate Change.  So the increase in the size of wild fires must be the result of the hypothesised 1 degree increase in temperatures in the West.  It is also the result of a longer fire season, say the experts tauted by the media experts , who’s ability to fly to the Rockies and look good in flannel is truly amazing.

They are talking about the fires like they are unrelated to us, but only a result of climate.  It’s at this point in the presentation that my hand is raised and the lecturer notices my questioning gesture with annoyance. 

I, just a Western native who has spent more time in the woods than a media type spends in a taxi or hired car, wonder about other changes that have occurred in the West in the last 15 or so years.

For example, the number of homes built in rural areas has skyrocketed, as wealthy city folk find luxury bargains in the sticks..  These people are less knowledgeable about living near forest lands than the people who made up most of these residents in past decades.  They therefore are not as savy about how to defend their homes from the threats of wildfire.  They may, for example, built in places where it would be difficult to defend a home from a fire or they may leave trees or other foliage to close to their homes, so wildfire can easily spread to these homes.

These experts never mention how the US Forest Service is allowing very little logging.  Areas that were logged in past decades, making natural fire breaks and clearing undergrowth from choked forests are now left to grow unchecked.  We are a lightening strike or a deliberately set fire away from a mega-fire.

Forests are now preserved as gems rather than conserved as resources to be managed and utilized.

We also aren’t talking about another new trend that coincides with the increased size of fires.  Intentionally set fires designed by arsonists to wreak maximum devastation.  Or the accidental fires caused by the increasing number of people out in our forest lands who are ignorant of fire conditions or safety.

It’s not that Climate doesn’t contribute to fire danger, it’s that only one factor is talked about as a significant contributor to the problem.  Global Warming!

News to fulfil a political agenda is not news, it’s propaganda.

For the true believers it is frustrating because some people will not be convinced to accept the believers point of view.

For the skeptics it is frustrating because so many people are convinced to accept the believers point of view even while the evidence is so thin and the conclusions are so far fetched.

For the undecided it is frustrating because the politicians and other powerful people are using the issue for their own agendas.  Making it very hard to distinguish between the truth and the lies or errors.

I guess for me, a known skeptic in general, I am most amused by the green movement people who are trying to squelch debate by talking of consensus as  proof of their theories of Global Warming.  If there is proof, then they should definitely point to it.  To say, however, that the matter is beyond debate because so many have been convinced is a nonstarter.  It makes me wonder what they know.  Are they trying to stop debate out of fear that the data will reverse direction as it did in passed pursuits of great theories of the past.

This reminds me of a small lesson I learned  in 5th Grade.  All of the students sat in a circle facing inward.  The teacher asked a question that required us to express an opinion.  There were two choices.  The teacher whispered in the ear of one student who immediately voiced an opinion about which was the right answer.  Another student, who did not confer with the teacher, disagreed.  The class was then asked to chose which was right.  After a few minutes, the whole class supported the student who had conferred with the teacher.  The teacher then asked if the fact that everyone chose the “more knowledgeable student” made that the right answer.  Most said yes.  The teacher tried to convince the lone student that they were incorrect.  The student swayed a bit but stood her ground.  The teacher asked again, does the fact that everyone else agrees the other student is right, make him right.  Most said yes it did.  Then the teacher let us know we were all wrong and the lone student was correct.  Regardless of how many people come to a consensus, it does not prove that consensus is correct.

No matter how many people believe the Earth is flat, or that bumps on the skull can predict a persons personality (Phrenology), or that the “hole” in the ozone layer is getting worse each year and must be dealt with immediately or the Earth will be  :wink: irreparably harmed.  All of these theories were accepted and had something of a consensus about the respective theory.  They were widely accepted and taught.  To question or disbelieve made you a laughing stock.    These theories also have one other thing in common.  They were all disproved and discarded.  Consensus is not proof.  Anybody who tries to use that argument as a means to “win” the debate, has resorted to the tactics of the lazy or the unsubstantiated.

There is an arrogance that says, inside of the human mind, that we are better now than they were back then.  We know so much more now, so we can’t be fooled by the data or our own prejudices again.  I say however, that in the centuries to come there will be as many amusing abandoned theories for them to look back at in our time as there are in any other throughout history.  Humanity is very consistent in its errors and weaknesses.  That is a theory I would bank on.   

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post’s poll.

First of all, life does not have to be perfect for us to be thankful. On an individual level we are normally pretty fortunate even in the hard times. I can point to all kinds of obstacles in my life right now for example (financial, career, personal) but on the upcoming holiday the purpose is to take stock. Look at all the good things in our lives and take a moment to be thankful for that. Those obstacles will still be there when we jump back into the daily grind.  The Thanksgiving for the Pilgrims was a time like this.  A celebration of good.  Hard-times still lay ahead for these people as they do for us and as they always will for people in the future.  I’m just thankful we have a time each year to pause and count up the good stuff and set the bad aside for a bit.

On a national or international level, the issues we are concerned about are still there.  Some people may not have this luxury.  There existence is too tenuous for reflection or celebration.  The concept may not exist in their culture.  It is a huge blessing to have the opportunity to celebrate a holiday like Thanksgiving. It is a huge blessing to take that opportunity and focus for a day or two on the good in our lives and maybe share some of this with the less fortunate around us.

Regardless of where you come down on issues like Global Warming, I hope we can agree on one thing. “Thank God for Thanksgiving.” “Thank God for The Blessings in our lives.”

Have a great Thanksgiving Holiday.

Brutus

First, I live in the Pacific Northwest.  Logging has been part of life here since pioneers settled this region.  In the early days logging was done for materials and to clear land.  The resource seemed infinite to them.  Over time lessons have been learned.  As logging techniques and technology has improved the amount of harvesting we can do, the limited size of the resource started to become clear.  Where trees were harvested before and the forest left to regrow on it’s own, someday, now there are about 6 seedlings planted for each mature tree harvested.  The time frame is about two to three years for replanting a clear-cut.  Most of the trees harvested today are not the huge old growth trees that were harvested in the past.  Now most trees harvested are 35 to 50 years old.  They run 3 or 4 feet in diameter at the butt.  Many are even smaller than that, being 18 inches on the butt.  Old growth trees that are harvested are not in high demand.   They are harvested for the health of the forest overall.  They are not in demand because most mills have been retooled to handle small logs.  The big logs simply won’t fit.  This is the modern way of logging here.  It is based on harvesting trees from areas that have been replanted and will be replanted for a future harvest down the road.

The concern about deforestation is normally centered on the Rainforest’s of Brazil and other South American nations.  It is clear to me that there is a real problem with the way the forests are managed down there.  They are not focused on future forests to meet future demand, but only on the money they can make by cutting trees now.  The problem is a made worse because of slave labor practices by loggers there and the illegal cutting done by people only focused on the here and now.

Is it a real problem?  Yes of course.  However, in statements made by various people on the issue they seem to focus on stopping logging altogether.  Trying to work against all of that inertia in a goal like that will make the goals set up by environmentalists unattainable.  What we need is to push for good forest management.  It does not throw their economy under the bus and gives them a reachable goal of sustainable logging practices.

In my experience, working within the limits of reason and common sense, makes a difficult goal much more attainable.  If the people want to make real change they (we) have to be realistic about what change we can shoot for.  The real problem lies first with the government and second with their culture.  It is not easy to change so much in a short time frame and I would say it will not change until they see the problems they are causing themselves.  By taking an adversarial tact on these issues, we are likely only to delay a change of heart rather than speed it forward.

All of that having been said, is logging causing Global Warming.  Well, if it is we are in real trouble.  You live in a structure of some type I would guess.  What should it be built of.  Cement, steel, or wood.  Two of those materials are mined, and nonrenewable.  One is renewable and sustainable.  Guess which one.  Next time it’s raining or freezing, try going outside for just one day and you will see why logging is important to your well being.  The United States is capable of supplying our economy with enough lumber and plywood to meet our demands and we have more trees in Oregon than when Lewis and Clark stopped by for a visit.  Logging can be done right and it can be done for the long term.

The amount of deforestation that has occurred is not insignificant but to say it is causing the temps to rise on a global scale seems a bit far-fetched.  Why is it when we see a problem that should be addressed, there is always some group who thinks it is a looming catastrophe of the highest magnitude.  Can’t the problem be of normal size with reasonable solutions on the table instead of the looming end of life argument.  This exaggeration is a technique designed to end debate.  Like the boy who cried wolf, it will be used too many times.  One day a real disaster may loom and we will ignore the warnings.  Instead of being an impossible problem to solve, it will be simple.  It might be ignored because of this kind of grand standing.  Does that prove that logging doesn’t cause Global Warming.  No.  But if it causes Global Warming the solution will be one type or another of suicide.  The assumption we should carry with us on such adventures is that life must go on.  If we can’t agree on that, we are not going to agree on any solutions.

Brutus

No, it is just a concept.  Necessary and yet dangerous. 

The key to control is another important concept, in fact maybe a couple of them. 

Balance and Freedom.

A society with only freedom is unruly and eventually unsafe.  A society with only control is oppressive and eventually tyrannical.

Balance is what makes it all work.  Finding that balance is not easy though. Society like the climate is dynamic.  Always moving one way or the other, passing balance on it’s way to the other extreme.  There are of course forces at work in any society that are willing to give up the oscillations around balance  and push toward and even beyond the extreme, to fulfill self interest at the cost of stability.  At the cost of control.  At the cost of freedom.  These forces are a genuine threat to civilization as we know it.

What wild talk.  What odd ideas.  What cynicism.

Are you suspicious of any group or organization?  I hope you are suspicious of something.  Otherwise you are the lamb being led to the slaughter.

You should be suspicious of all of them.  Because it is not ideology that corrupts the purposes of a group, it is its size and power.  Whether it is a religious organization, a political party, or political movement.  All are corruptible because they are run by people.  When these people serve their own self interests before those of the group they lead, then they are worse than of no value, they are a threat to the goals of the organization.  Even a threat to the organization itself.  If those who believe in the movement do not keep the goals and actions pure then at some point the hypocrisy becomes plain to all and often the organization is fatally injured.

We see this now in the Global Warming Movement.  The political leaders of the movement are exaggerating the predictions and in some cases making up catastrophes that are not expected to increase the alarm in the general populace.  They can reap the rewards of the extra attention they generate.  This will become evident in the future.  For those who look at the data we have available now, many conclusions touted by the movement are contrary to common sense.  This exaggeration and fabrication isn’t helping the environment,  Instead it is creating a ‘hand over our freedom mindset’.  If citizens looked at the costs vs the benefits they would flatly deny these expectations, but because they are ‘to save the planet’, they are revered as great sacrifices for the good of the planet.  The power of that emotional plee to over-ride logic and thought is what makes it so appealing to the power hungry.

It is not too much to ask for evidence supporting the claims of a government, or organization.  Accountability is not threat to a true heart, to a true motive.

We are not looking at the end of the planet or civilization.  The climate is changing very slowly.  The climate will continue to do this and has done it in the past.  The climate has not only been this warm before but far warmer.  Check sources about the history of our climate that are not part of a movement one way or the other.  Find your own sources and be objective.  It’s not too much to ask, for the good of society.  Before you get hoodwinked into giving our society away, be sure of what they are planning to do with it.  If you find out they were dishonest about the future only after you have given away the store you will only be able to stand outside and cry over the loss.  What a tragedy that would be, to only have your memory of being free.

Brutus

The evidence was shown and explained but people would not listen.  It was clear according to the studies of our most knowledgeable on the subject that action had to be taken and taken very soon.  People, however, lived their lives the way they wanted to.  They did not make the changes prescribed to avoid the catastrophe.  They went on blind as a bat.  You could talk to them and show them the evidence.  Plead with them to try to make some small changes, hoping it would be enough.  No, most would not hear of it.  They were too caught up in their world and their possessions.  They went headlong into oblivion, not even realizing it was disaster enveloping them when the end came. 

Well, it saddens me to think of how useless their loss was.  You see Global Warming was small compared to the real threat to mankind.

Judgement.

Yeah, that which humanity was trying to save is gone now, like an ember in the fire.  It wasn’t the Earth that needed saving, it was humanity.  Sadly the price was already paid, all they had to do was accept the gift.  Noble to try and save a planet and all who live on it but they could not save even one of themselves.  Maybe too many superhero movies or something.  Or maybe they thought because they could understand a little around them, they could control it all.  I don’t know, but in the end it’s better to know then to think we know.

An illustration of the similarity between religion and Global Warming.  In talking to people about the subject over the years, the knowledge of its certainty is complete and whole, even though the individuals knowledge on the subject is nothing more than regurgitated platitudes from the media or some celeb.  The faith is amazing to behold, but I tell you the truth, the evidence supporting the Bible as true is far, far more expansive than that supporting the Theory of Global Warming.

My challenge for anyone investigating the theory.  Check it out for yourself.  Don’t rely on Conventional Wisdom to build your faith.  You see for me, I listened to Conventional Wisdom about the Bible.  How it was useless and full of contradictions.  Until one day it occurred to me I did not know that to be true, I had just heard it.  It took 9 years of investigating God for me to conclude what was the right path.  7 1/2 of those years were spent looking everywhere else but the Bible.  Even after coming to the Bible it was 1 1/2 years before I knew enough to be sure that it was the Bible that was right.  I found Conventional Wisdom to be wrong and found the Bible to be without contradictions.  All other religious books I had investigated paled in comparison.

All I am saying is that Conventional Wisdom will often lead you astray.  Look with an open mind at the evidence for yourself.  You may find some startling facts.

Here’s to good old fashioned skepticism,

Brutus

So I thought about carbon footprints.

I realised I had one.  We all do.  Then I thought about the environment.  Bear have a carbon footprint.  Deer, Elk, Cougars all have them.  Squirels have them.  Why?  Because they exhale, like us.  They don’t have as big a carbon footprint but they have one.  And there are a lot of squirels, for example.  To make matters worse, Deer and Elk eat foliage.  This has a multiplying effect on their carbon footprint.

Wow, what an Epiphany.  We have to save the environment.  Since we are the only species that is aware of the plight of the environment, then it is up to us to save it.  First, in order to reduce our carbon footprints, we need to reduce.  We need to reduce the population of animals on the planet by half in the next few years.  Next, we need to increase the number of plants on the planet.  Wait, I see a problem.  While plants consume CO2, they also emmit carbon and hydrogen as part of the normal respiration.  Worse, when fallen leaves or needles decompose they produce methane.  A green house gas much more potent than CO2.  Well the answer is clear.  The problem is not man.  It’s life.  The only way we can save the environment is to eradicate the primary cause of it’s destruction.  Life!

Ridicules!  Yes, and so are the assertions of the Global Warming Crowd.  Here is a link to an interesting article in Wikipedia.   Interesting how this article talks of cooler and warmer times than right now.  Larger effects on the Environment and yet it is all still here.  Even with Ice Ages and Warm Spells in the Arctic, life goes on.  Think you are a responsible environmental person?  Then read this about our ice age history.  According to this article, land formations and continental positions play a huge role in Ice Ages.  And the most common condition of Earth historically is one without the great ice sheet’s we still have today.

Man Made Global Warming, Ha.  How about Man Made Global Hoax.

I’m not just skeptical about Global Warming but am down right fed up with it.

Sence when does any scientific theory stand above debate and testing.

According to the Scientific Theory, NEVER.

Science is about test and retest not about protecting a particular pet theory for ones own aims.

Science is knowledge and it is powerful but when it is used for propaganda it stops being science and starts being a religon.

There is a lot of history about science that has been ruined by those who have too much to lose.  It is the darkest side of what is an otherwise noble endeavor.

Please at least be convinced by the evidence you see with your own eyes and not the fear tactics of a political movement.

Be skeptical,

Brutus