This GW/Climate Change thing is a nightmare for the "logical thinking Joe", the non-specialist in climatology, the political cynic, the rationalist who has no political allegiance nor ulterior motive, but who simply wants to be the ideal citizen of an ideal democracy - and to consider "just he facts, ma'am?
For instance, even this eco-site below apparently did not realize the further implications of the story they were pushing recently: "Solar activity influences temperature" on: http://www.climateark.org/shared/reader/welcome.aspx?linkid=113778 The total solar irradiance is not a constant factor. It fluctuates periodically around a value of 1365 watts per square meter. The best-known cycle has an average duration of 11 years. It has only been possible to measure solar activity directly since 1978, but the number of sun spots -- a measure of solar activity -- has been observed through telescopes from as far back as the year 1610.... read the story for all the details. Anyway, all any careful thinker can honestly say in the end, given the contractions in the underlying science, is that: 1) Yes, human activity influences climate 2) Yes, solar cycles influence climate even more so. and probably 3) Yes, this year we lucked out, in that solar activity was extremely low- almost an anomaly which served to counterbalance the negative increases in human activity --- ...and irrationally emboldened the algoresque category of GW critics (and OPEC, Big-oil apologists) to step forward to present the best case for "staying the course"... IOW we got lucky in 2008. 4) But, in a few years, this temporary amelioration of our ongoing climate predicament has left open the possibility that -- with 'more of the same inertia' on earth at the policy level, yet with a much more active sun, we might not be so lucky soon - and we will essentially have NO winter in areas where winter is important for a "balance"... ... there is a huge 'sword of Damocles' looming over our collective heads... the massive deposits of frozen Arctic methane, much more sinister than CO2, which is in the balance - and which the Bimbo-neocons seem to be completely ignorant of, as a much greater risk factor than sequential small increases in carbon... BTW - did anyone see our (California) Guvernator on 60 Minutes just now? Fantastic. This is the next best guy in politics these days, a real pragmatist with humor and class - the hands-down choice to succeed BO in eight years, so let's get a Constitutional Amendment ready for him ;-) And, thankfully - as I have given up TV, I was 'lucky' or would not even have seen the interview, had I not been visiting a place with a boob-tube. Fate. Hey - let's get rid of both parties, and all PACs -- in favor of intelligent pragmatists with a sense of humor... Jones
