If all that were happening on the climate-change front, do you think you'd be hearing about it on the news? Seeing it on Page 1 of your daily paper? Would politicians be exclaiming that global warming was even more of a crisis than they'd thought? Would environmentalists be skewering global-warming "deniers" for clinging to their skepticism despite the growing case against it?Absolutely. Al Gore says there's no debate. Regular people are starting to know better. This will be looked back at in history as a great delusion.
No doubt.
But it isn't such hints of a planetary warming trend that have been piling up in profusion lately. Just the opposite.
(...)
But considering how much attention would have been lavished on a comparable run of hot weather or on a warming trend that was plainly accelerating, shouldn't the recent cold phenomena and the absence of any global warming during the past 10 years be getting a little more notice? Isn't it possible that the most apocalyptic voices of global-warming alarmism might not be the only ones worth listening to?
Bizzarre reading this in the Boston Globe. I thought Global Warming was part of their kool-aid mix.
Meanwhile, Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts thinks the world is ending:
"Climate change is not governed by a recession, it's governed by scientific facts about what's happening to Earth. And you either accept the realities of the science or you don't," said Democratic Senator John Kerry.
He spoke after some of his colleagues argued that the United States should not impose a cap-and-trade system for so-called greenhouse gases blamed for global warming because it amounts to a painful tax during a deep downturn.
"You don't enter a mutual suicide pact because the economy is having a hard time right now," Kerry said after meeting with UN Secretary Ban Ki-moon seven months before global climate change talks in Denmark's capital.
