Thursday, February 19, 2009

Reactionaries VS. Conservationists

"Two separate studies through NASA confirm that since 2003, the world's oceans have been losing heat. In the peak of the recent warming trend, 1998 actually ranked 2nd to 1934 as the warmest year on record.
...A second, independent study was conducted. Takmeng Wong and his colleagues at NASA’s Langley Research Center in Virginia came up with the same results. Wong studies net flux of solar energy at the top of our atmosphere. From the 1980s to 1990s his team noticed increased amounts net energy when comparing incoming solar energy to what Earth radiates and reflects. Since then, the solar flux has remained the same. Other studies have suggested that the sun's output has decreased in the past few years.
Wong's take is that melting arctic ice is responsible for the cooling of the oceans. I contend that if that were the case, why did it take until 2003 to show cooling, after a few decades of warming? Also, the UKMET office showed that Earth's temperatures have been cooling for the past five years. Since 75% of the planet is water, that would make sense. Just last week, I wrote about the arctic sea ice returning to 1979 levels just 1 1/2 years after the fear of the biggest summer ice retreat in 2007..." (source)

The Man and I are conscious of the need for Conservation. I have talked about this before and I wish there was a term for what we are...conservationists (or good stewards of the earth) that don't believe in man-made global warming/colling trends. We didn't start conserving when Al Gore told us to...we always have. We are Conservationists, not Reactionaries... The Global Warming people don't have to stop buying biodegradable diapers if they admit that the since they were relying on was faulty. They can still buy the 99 cent cloth bags at the grocery store. You don't have to buy into the fact that man has created the weather situation to believe that as inhabitants here we should conserve and preserve...

No comments: