[ RadSafe ] RE: The hot and cold of history & journalistic credibility

[Dan W McCarn]

Hi Brent:

My skepticism to fully embrace Global Warming is based on four issues:

1) Every time I examine a Pleistocene to Holocene depositional environment,
I see the overprint of rapid climate change;
2) The climate has a greater propensity to take sudden drops in temperature
than rises. If we have another Krakatau (1883), the dust shrouding may
rapidly cool the entire earth in the span of a single year;
3) The driver for so much of the funding for selective research and science
has been politically motivated;
4) I take deep offence at something being rammed down my throat by the
media, which I basically distrust with regards the accuracy and bias of
their reporting in most areas of my direct experience.  Why should I trust
them in areas where I know relatively little?

Now then: if I trusted the media, what political positions would I have?
Liberal?  Conservative?  Should I disregard the 14 years of overseas
experience that I have because it doesn't happen to match what the media is
trying to sell me on today in their revisionist historical mode regardless
of their political bent?

Let's not mix apples with oranges, because in the end, you get fruit salad!

Dan W McCarn, Geologist
Albuquerque & Houston

>From Wiki: "In the year following the eruption, average global temperatures
fell by as much as 1.2 degrees Celsius. Weather patterns continued to be
chaotic for years, and temperatures did not return to normal until 1888"

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl [mailto:radsafe-bounces at radlab.nl] On Behalf
Of ROGERS, Brent
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 19:49
To: 'Syd H. Levine'; Susan Gawarecki; RADSAFE; gary at pageturners.com
Subject: RE: [ RadSafe ] RE: The hot and cold of history & journalistic
credibility

...or possibly because true conservatives never, I mean NEVER change their
minds on ANYTHING once it is set, despite the preponderance of evidence
placed before them.  The current Veep, and his continued rosy outlook on
Iraq being the number 1 example coming to mind at the moment.

Brent Rogers
Leader Commercial Radiation Safety Group
Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation
PMB 1, Menai NSW 2234
T 61 2 9717 3251
F 61 2 9717 9266
M 0417 231 879
E brent.rogers at ansto.gov.au 
www.ansto.gov.au
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Syd H. Levine [mailto:syd.levine at mindspring.com] 
Sent: Friday, 9 February 2007 10:04 AM
To: Susan Gawarecki; RADSAFE; gary at pageturners.com
Subject: Re: [ RadSafe ] RE: The hot and cold of history &
journalisticcredibility

Because it is speculative alarmism?  Because conservatives seem to think 
more clearly?

For some reason, there
> is a branch of conservatism that strongly resists the scientific evidence 
> for global warming.