As most everyone here knows, the norm – in geologic terms – is for the earth to be in an ice age, not our current comfy, warmy present. The present era, known as an interglacial period (this one is called the Holocence) has lasted a bit over 10,000 years now and, based on the record, probably won’t last a hell of a lot longer.
This video, featuring Dr. Sherwood Idso, puts carbon dioxide and entirely natural climate change in context really well. It’s just a tad techie, but not too much for most of y’all I think. (With the possible exception of Floyd, depending on how early he started on today’s case of Schlitz). Take a peek, and then I’ll tell you why Sherwood Idso is one of the true heroes of climate realism.
Dr. Sherwood Idso was one of the first scientists to speak out against global warming hysteria, back in the 80′s when this nonsense was first getting started. A certain Senator from Tennessee rigged a sub-committee to discredit Idso’s work back then. (I’ll let you guess who that might be).
None-the-less, Idso pressed on and even passed that legacy on to his sons, Keith and Craig – both of whom have doctorates as well. Their website, co2science.org, is one of the most important respositories of sensible information regarding greenhouse gases and their role in the environment. The website is the face on the internets for their organization: The Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, doing yeoman’s work to stop the green global takeover.
(PS: Some dolt filed another piece of drivel at Front Page again today. Sheesh!)
Print
Digg
StumbleUpon
del.icio.us
Facebook
Yahoo! Buzz
Twitter
Google Bookmarks
Google Buzz
LinkedIn
MSN Reporter
MySpace
Orkut
Ping.fm
Reddit
RSS
Slashdot
Technorati
Tumblr
Webnews.de
About your “drivel,” you make a remarkable point about the costs associated with dropping pre-conditions. The individual mandate is supposed to take care of that problem – forcing everyone to buy insurance – but given the rather shady constitutionality, if the mandate is dropped during the almost imminent Supreme Court case, there emerges a situation where most have no reason to buy insurance unless they absolutely need it. That means gigantic loss of profit for insurance companies, who are now forced to cover individuals who have not paid any appreciable sum into the system in the first place. Those who signed on before developing a “pre-condition” are forced to subsidize those who just bought into the system, and are now paying sky-high premiums as a result. Republicans need to do a better job of explaining this circumstance to the voter, and why it’s a path to a single-payer system that even most blue dogs dread.
Here’s a question for Veruckt:
Assuming that this works out the way we expect, with people foregoing insurance until they get sick and the subsequent rise in premiums, could it not happen that—aside from very serious illnesses—people will begin to pay out of pocket for most health care, bringing prices down?
Of course, that would mean the end of the insurance industry, and there are easier ways to bring the free market to bear on the problem of spiralling medical costs.