RE: [Paddlewise] Winter in a time of Climate Change

I have always been impressed with the knowledge of people connected with
Paddlewise. I certainly don't claim to have the mathematical or scientific
skills of many of the other posters I read here. For some reason, I still
seem to feel capable of forming an opinion.

Now Rich seems to have a lot of scientific knowledge and he says of the CNW
study:

This is, of course, pure garbage -- the result of a spurious "study"
by a *marketing* company and not the conclusion of an actual scientific
endeavor.  Actual scientific studies done by actual scientists at MIT,
Argonne and CMU trash this largely-fabricated nonsense.
While the study itself starts our saying CNW:
... a well-established reputation for industry forecasting, made claims last
year that that hybrid vehicles used more energy in their lifetime, from
creation to disposal, than many SUVs.
And ends saying:
While its methodology may remain unclear, the report does include some
useful and eye-opening information that few car shoppers had likely even
thought about. Hopefully this controversy will spur shoppers to demand more
information about the vehicles they drive other than emissions and mpg and
consider the big-picture impact.
I, being a person on the right often think of my left leaning friends as
well meaning, but wrong, while I think many of the people on the left
consider the right as downright meanspirited! Anyone claiming to be against
the idea of global warming is called a "denier" automatically considered to
be part of an oil industry conspiracy.
Peter O says: "Thanks to Dave, Craig and all for their support of the need
for scientific rigour", as if the people holding a different view think less
of the scientific method.
Dave says he used to be a skeptic (yes Dave, tell us how you felt trying to
buck the system!), but now says the global climate changes have changed his
mind. BUT we've already acknowledged the climate is changing it is the
REASON that's up for debate. I accept that he has accepted the belief of the
scientist involved that CO2 is the reason; I have not
I agree its not useful to look at one cold winter to debunk global warming,
but tell me, how many times have you heard of one incident, Hurricane
Katrina, used as proof of it's existence? For every record cold temperature
listed lately, I can tell you of two that been reported in the last many
years to substantiate GW.
I know Craig to be intelligent and he says I can trust the scientists, but I
don't trust the UN or many other sources. Even NASA's GISS seems to have
problems coming up with the truth and although Rich complains of CNW
providing their methodology, how about this with the GISS:
McIntyre also cast doubts on NASA's methods of collecting data and on its
transparency, claiming that the old data should have been kept up on the Web
site for comparison, and NASA should have alerted the public to the changes.
Furthermore, he says, he had asked repeatedly to see the "source code" NASA
uses to calculate its numbers, and had been repeatedly denied.
Just lately NASA had to rescind it statement of October being the hottest in
a gazillion years when they admitted they'd calculated the last months temps
twice. I will admit I have little confidence in James Hansen of NASA
although I did just read this quote from him:

"It's the fact that money talks in Washington..."
On which side are the billions and billions of government dollars on???
Mark
***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List - Any opinions or suggestions expressed
here are solely those of the writer(s). You must assume the entire
responsibility for reliance upon them. All postings copyright the author.
Submissions:     PaddleWise_at_PaddleWise.net
Subscriptions:   PaddleWise-request_at_PaddleWise.net
Website:         http://www.paddlewise.net/
***************************************************************************