The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 3 of 15)

Spectator ? br> -- Keith Kunzler /p> p> Probably no harm, maybe even some good, would come from signing up for Kyoto, as William Tucker suggests, but to get an idea of just how unscientific (and how political) the global warming scare really is, one should go to this well-documented article in the Telegraph (London) from May 11. Just a cursory reading, or a mere glance at companion graphs, and one learns that the earth was very much warmer during the three centuries 1100 A.D. to 1400 A.D. than it is at present. To get a perspective of just what utter non-sense the present campaign is based on, one need only divide 125 (the number of years for which we have had modern, recorded weather data) by 4 x 10 to the 8th power (the approximate age of the planet). The data cited by the Inconvenient Truthers is, to say the least, insignificantly tiny (not to mention poorly distributed). br> -- Ty Knoy br> Ann Arbor, Michigan /p>

Mr.. William Tucker should be commended for his fight for nuclear power. From an economic standpoint, national security, as well as from an ecological perspective nuclear power is the best alternative to fossil fuels. However, I fear Mr. Tucker has fallen into the trap that many well-meaning people have when considering CO2 and our climate. Kyoto is a byproduct of CO2 science and Paleoclimatology. To sum up the argument concisely, those who favor Kyoto argue that the last two decades of the 20th century were the warmest in 1,000 years, and that 1998 was the warmest year of the Holocene Era. This warming isn't natural, but anthropogenic. Man caused this warming through the use of massive amounts of fossil fuels. These fossil fuels increased the CO2 count in our atmosphere, and this increased CO2 has over time trapped incoming solar radiation in the lower atmosphere. Hence, Global Warming.

topics:
Taxes, Trade, Harry Reid, Social Security, Environment, Global Warming, Constitution, Law, Military, Iraq, Africa, Energy, Oil, Medicare