Monday, January 26, 2009

Are "warmists" alarmists?

As a confirmed doubter about the "truth" of so-called anthropogenic warming of the planet myself, I was interested to read the ever vigilant co-conspirator Christopher Booker's article in yesterday's Sunday Telegraph.

"The vast mass of Antarctica, all satellite evidence has shown, has been getting colder over the past 30 years. Last year's sea-ice cover was 30 per cent above average."

I know it's not popular to say this but why the f**k do we continue to bang on about global warming being a man-made phenomenon? I wrote this blog last year about James Lovelock, (pictured) the man who developed the "Gaia" theory that the Earth is a living organism with self-healing powers that, for the most part, are beyond the power of us humans to control.

It was interesting to watch the "Explorer" programme on BBC2 last night which had a segment on a glacier in Argentina that refuses to conform to the stereotype of the IPCC reports that are pumped out regularly by the lazy media. (In fact, it was film of this glacier "calving" into the sea that had been used by Al Gore in his infamous film despite the fact that it had not reduced in size for any time that it has been measured in the past 18 years. On the other hand, we were told about another glacier that has shrunk by a kilometre in the last four years. OK, but why the difference in the two?)

I'm all in favour of conserving resources, re-cycling and cutting energy consumption but please don't try to convince me that the world will come to an end if I don't pay more taxes. My children and yours have enough to worry about as a result of the disastrous Labour government's mismanagement of our economy


Oldrightie said...

I've always agreed that the arguments are mostly arrogant individuals promoting tax generating ideas and overstating the value of the human race to the planet.
A drive to reduce human populations, hence demand and activity, is my favoured option. World wars or land grabbing used to do that.
100 years of careful management of the ever unstoppable growth in populations ought to be possible. Or would that bugger up consumer demand?