6/27/2006

Global Warming - Republican Agreement!!


WASHINGTON - Weighing in on the highest profile debate about global warming, the nation's premier science policy body on Thursday voiced a "high level of confidence" that Earth is the hottest it has been in at least 400 years, and possibly even the last 2,000 years.

A panel convened by the National Research Council reached that conclusion in a broad review of scientific studies, reporting that the evidence indicates “recent warmth is unprecedented for at least the last 400 years.”

The panel of top climate scientists told lawmakers that the Earth is running a fever and that “human activities are responsible for much of the recent warming.”

“There is nothing in this report that should raise any doubts about the broad scientific consensus on global climate change.” - Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, House Energy and Commerce Committee chairman.


Click here for full story, MSNBC


technorati: ,

2 comments:

Ted Gossard said...

Bob,
We have a weatherman here in GR who is doubtful about "global warming", I think in terms of being environmentally induced by pollutants.

I am more than less convinced of global warming (pretty evident, in your face, by this report, it seems). And am convinced we humans dump bad stuff in our water and air.

What needs to be more clearly demonstrated to me is how our pollution is tied to global warming. I know it is said to be a greenhouse effect. But can this be demonstrated clearly by science? The article presented no such demonstration. I must be missing something. Certainly I don't read scientific journals, etc (which, of the nonlayman ones, I wouldn't get much out of anyhow).

Having said all of that, I'm willing to go along with a crack down against pollution, since I simply see it as hurtful and destructive to humans and the world. (and this IS clearly demonstrable)

Ted Gossard said...

Am I to see the Al Gore movie? Something I have no plans of doing.

The problem with me concerning Al Gore is that it seems like he is taking those on one radical end of that controversy as the ones who are most scientific. But is this presentation, in balance, really the consensus of the broader scientific community, I would ask?