This Week in the Mercury

24/7 Jihad

Books

24/7 Jihad

The Mirage Reverses the Roles in the War on Terror


All Shook Up

Food and Drink

All Shook Up

Oven and Shaker's Italian Comfort Food



Monday, July 20, 2009

2009 Climate Change Schmuck Challenge

Posted by Sarah Mirk on Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Former Oregon Secretary of State Bill Bradley Twitters:

dcaf/1248119787-picture_1.png

The challenge he's referring to is a get rich quick scheme from a blogger who's willing to bet global warming skeptics $25 dollars a day that the world is getting hotter.

Victoria Taft is the charming local radio host who coins phrases like "crap and trade". But is she chicken? Victoria and all other global warming deniers can take Nate up on his offer right here.

 

Comments (7) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
1
Daily average temps over the course of a month are supposed to be an indicator of climate change? LOL. Some real science at work there.
Secondly, most people don't disagree there are warming/cooling trends in the climate - like Earth, it is not static.
The debate is over whether or not these causes are MAN MADE, something Nate should be challenged to prove.
Posted by D on July 20, 2009 at 1:51 PM · Report
2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_op…

To paraphrase, no scientific body of national or international standing is of the opinion that the climate change of the last fifty years is *not* man-made, although some organizations hold non-committal positions. There are statements by individual scientists that disagree, however.

I think the burden of proof should be on those who are trying to disprove the theory. Definitively proving a scientific theory is difficult, but if the dissenters are correct it should be comparatively easy to disprove.
Posted by tk. on July 20, 2009 at 2:24 PM · Report
3
Whatever the merits of anthropogenic climate change, this co-called "challenge" proves absolutely nothing. Isn't it a little bit ironic (not in an Alanis way) that someone claiming to be a statistician is proposing something with such obvious statistical flaws?

The real issue with climate change is not whether it's occurring -- it's what to do about it, or, really, what we can do about it. The answer is nothing. Better to adapt to it than to flail about trying to change it.
Posted by mr. voluptuous on July 20, 2009 at 2:33 PM · Report
4
The challenge is in response to an idiot who claims we are actually in a cooling trend, so, yes, it's a pretty valid gesture to flush out the stupid.
Posted by The Guilty Carnivore on July 20, 2009 at 3:16 PM · Report
5
"The answer is nothing. Better to adapt to it than to flail about trying to change it."
Thank you. If anyone had the sense enough to step back and rationally say 'we are changing laws to try and change the climate' they might start to realize how ridiculous and futile the efforts are.

And with the pollution powerhouses of Russia, India and China, who give a rat's a$$ about it all, good luck with that. But at least they FEEL better about THEMSELVES, which is what it's all about. Mother Nature laughs.



Posted by D on July 20, 2009 at 3:27 PM · Report
6
A few years ago the conservative talking points were that there was no such thing as global warming and everyone should just calm down and get a Hummer. They have now amended their language to include the phrase "man made." There may be some debate in the scientific community about the causes of global warming, but the the bottom line is that "conservative" (now there's an ironic word choice) community has never been overly concerned about the thoughts of the scientific community, then or now.

Surprisingly, the O had a very perceptive editorial over the weekend about global warming as it appears in Oregon textbooks. Apparently the textbooks call into question the "greenhouse effect" (which is like calling into question the theory of conductivity) and imply that the developing world are responsible for this mess, if it in fact exists.

Fun fact: different kinds of pollution have different effects on the atmosphere. "Clean" pollution, which is prevalent in first world countries like ours, is the "greenhouse" part of the equation. "Dirty" pollution, which is more of a second and third world problem at the moment, can actually block solar radiation, producing (some scientists say) an opposite effect. So there is certainly room for improvement at home before we decide to wag our finger at the rest of the world.
Posted by atomic on July 20, 2009 at 3:47 PM · Report
7
I'm not wagging our USA finger at them, it is what it is. My point is that the existence of those factors invalidates one nations' attempts to do something.
But science is not a consensus based, well, science.
Guess what put more of your bad pollution into the atmosphere than the out put of every combustible engine since its invention?
One volcanic eruption from Mt St Helens.
Mother Nature laughs at your plans.
Posted by D on July 20, 2009 at 4:07 PM · Report

Add a comment

/images/adoftheweek.gif

ad of the day

The Handyman Pro - Your Honey-Do Specialist
Don’t let our name fool you. The Handyman Pro, LLC is a repair and remodel service provider with over 25-years experience. We cover all aspects of construction and repairs for residential and commercial clients.go


post an ad

All contents © Index Newspapers, LLC

115 SW Ash St. Suite 600
Portland, OR 97204

Contact Info | Privacy Policy | Production Guidelines | Terms of Use