Forests and trees
Mark Steyn makes his bid to reduce global warming:
I think he should get it. It would be better spent than more money going to people who engage in outright fraud:
Here's a headline from the National Post of Canada last Friday: "Forests may contribute to global warming: study." This was at Stanford University. They developed a model that covered most of the Northern Hemisphere in forest and found that global temperature increased three degrees, which is several times more than the alleged CO2 emissions. Heat-wise, a forest is like a woman in a black burka in the middle of the Iraqi desert. In my state of New Hampshire, we've got far more forest than we did a century or two ago. Could reforestation be causing more global warming than my 700m-per-litre Chevrolet Resource-Depleter? Clearly I need several million dollars to investigate further.
I think he should get it. It would be better spent than more money going to people who engage in outright fraud:
Question: Why do most global warming advocates begin their scare statistics with "since 1970"?
As in, "since 1970" there's been global surface warming of half a degree or so.
Because from 1940 to 1970, temperatures fell.
Now why would that be?
Who knows? Maybe it was Hitler. Maybe world wars are good for the planet.
Or maybe we should all take a deep breath of CO2 and calm down.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home