You picked the wrong example because, of course I deny the connection
because there isn't any that can be scientifically demonstrated. Pay
attention here because the source is "Nature", not well known as a
"denier" forum.
<http://rogerpielkejr.blogspot.com/2012/11/little-change-in-drought-over-60-years.html>
As it turns out, drought is in the same category as the claims of
increased frequency and severity of storms. Sorry, the data just
doesn't support the popular press.
Incidentally, I don't deny that there is an anthropogenic component to
modern temperature rises but that it's actually much smaller than
climate models would have us believe. Carbon dioxide, in and of itself,
has a limited effect on temperature. Armageddon comes about from the
supposed cascade of follow-on events initiated by the early carbon
dioxide warming. The only thing that points to adhering to the
"precautionary principle" is about 20 climate models whose accuracy
records for short term warming (20 years) are abominably poor. I
believe the task cannot be accomplished due to the chaotic nature of
climate and the (still poor) understanding of what drives it. Of
course, the modelers would never say that as they wouldn't have a job.
Chuck Norcutt
On 2/21/2013 9:55 AM, Jan Steinman wrote:
>> From: Chuck Norcutt <chucknorcutt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>
>> Your solution is perfectly sensible but only if it has no
>> appreciable cost.
>
> Back at 'cha, dude!
>
> Keep in mind that the "status quo" has a cost, as well. I know you
> deny the connection, but what if -- what if! -- human-caused climate
> change caused the loss of a billion dollars worth of corn from the
> drought last year?
>
> The Hirsch Report claims that climate change will soon have an impact
> equivalent to 3% to 5% of global GDP *on the low end* and perhaps 15%
> on the high end. That's a lot of corn.
>
> The "precautionary principle" says that when the result of an action
> *may be* catastrophic, don't take that action, even if you aren't
> certain of cause and effect.
>
> Of course, those who deny humans are impacting the climate aren't
> swayed by the precautionary principle, anyway. But at some point, the
> discussion moves beyond trying to convince the opposition to trying
> to convince the fence-sitters.
>
> ---------------- :::: I went to the woods because I wished to live
> deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I
> could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die,
> discover that I had not lived. -- Henry David Thoreau :::: Jan
> Steinman, EcoReality Co-op ::::
>
>
>
>
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|