"Obama's An Idiot" is where my political bitches now live. Go ye thereto and read.

Friday, July 28, 2006

Global Warming, AlGore And All Thing (Junk) Scientific

So I was reading a post over on Og's blog, where he related a 'conversation' he had with an - go figger - Ejukator.
This dude evidently teaches some geology courses in community college, so he of course is more than qualified to be preaching on the imminent demise of Mother Earth via Eeeeevil SUV's and "Global Warming".

Ladies and gentlemen, I would now like you to meet GeoMan!

Okay, you're back. Good. We'll continue.

So, Og shoots off an email to GeoMan:
You have made a great point of explaining the scientific process, and yet you accept the shibboleth of global warming as dogma, when it clearly is not. Less than five hundred years of temperature measurement exist. Less than a hundred of that with any real level of calibration of the instrumentation. All of that measurement has taken place on or near land, with no data for the oceans, which cover a pretty large portion of the planet. No knowledge of the temperature variation can be given before that, except as reasonably educated wild ass guesses based on any number of factors. We don't know if the earth is warming or cooling beyond the last hundred or so years, and what is more important, we have NO idea if warming trends regularly cycle over the course of thosands of years and by how much. All that exist are guesses. Basing a theory of global warming on guesses is the worst kind of junk science. Pity, your site seemed to show such promise.
Which, I think are all very valid points. So what did Geotard have to say?:
All good points, but consider this: we are returning massive amounts of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere due to the burning of fossil fuels. Will this have an impact? I say yes. What do you think?
To which Og asks - and this is classic:
Less carbon dioxide by far than magmatic gasses and other tectonic activity have in similar time periods. It's bunk. We cannot have any idea.

Does that mean we should just randomly go around doing everything we can to fuck up the planet? by no means. Every reasonable effort should be made to protect the environment- and by reasonable I mean regulations that allow people to live their lives (which includes motor vehicles, like it or not) and allows businesses to exist and profit.

The earth is ours. We can take care of it, and exist with it, and we can do so without fear mongering pseudoscientific garbage putting unnecessary restriction on people's lives.

By the way: I live on the front lines, and not in an ivory tower. Stricter and more stringent regulations by the EPA and other state and local agencies have had the effect of driving smokestack industries to push their manufacturing elsewhere. Places like China. Where there are NO restrictions. The net effect has been this: Steel production, which will ALWAYS proceed, has gone from having 90% of it's emissions scrubbed and cleaned (in the USA) to having all it's emissions dumped directly into the atmosphere (china, eastern Europe). The primary source for this move has been the tightening of EPA restrictions, the secondary and tertiary being OSHA and Union pressure. So what has this done? taken the business from US industries who were making slow but reasonable efforts to reduce emissions, and handed jobs, business, cash flow to countries where human life is meaningless and where no restrictions on emissions exist.

At the end, the earth will deal with the effect of humans as it has dealt with the effect of every other species; it will carry on. With a planet obviously unchanged in any physical way by, say, the dinosaurs, who generated more carbon emissions than all the cars that ever drove on or off any road, it is not only ludicrous to think Humans can have lasting effects on the planet, it is immeasurable pomposity.

[emphasis mine]
To which he didn't hear anything for a couple of days, so he writes back:

So, are you researching for your response to my last email, or have you chosen to ignore it?

and got this response:

I'm choosing to ignore it - way too much negative energy for an overworked geologist during a hectic summer.
Okay, so in short, he gave up. He had no answer other than to ignore the question because of negative energy?

And here's the best part: On his web site, there's a section called "Ask GeoMan". Below that is a paragraph which reads:
"This is your chance to ask GeoMan any earth or space science question you want. Be warned, however: the "nature of nature" is such that I may not be able to come up with a reasonable answer! If I can't, I will be sure to tell you (as opposed to making up some bogus response)."

Yeah, that's the sort of people we have preparing the younger generation for "The Real World".
He couldn't come up with a reasonable answer, nor could he avoid making up a bogus response.

Reminds me of something I heard once:

Those who can - do.
Those who can't - teach.
Those who can't teach - teach college.


Just D said...

My best friend is a PhD in cellular physiology over in the UK (occasionally referred to on my blog as "the WRS"). They are all required to be pompous asses. I think they have a course for it in PhD school.

curmudgeon said...

I maybe shouldn't be so harsh. I mean, I did learn a lot in college.
But some of them... Well, you know.

Jean said...

there are good teachers.... and bad teachers.
Still an excellent post, Mr. C.