No subject

[Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other=]

hardy  Aroids)" <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL> Aroids)" <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL>
Sender: "Arisaema Enthusiast Group (AEG) Discussion List (and other=
From: loneroc <loneroc at MWT.NET>
Subject: Re: global warning
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transf er-Encoding: 7bit

George,

Here's anecdotal evidence of something:  You be the judge of how it fits
with Adam's experience and with the global warming hypothesis. I'm about =3
hours NW of Adam in a cold (zone 3) pocket in SW Wisconsin, USA.  In the
nearly ten years I've lived here there have been one or maybe two snowy
winters.  Old timers here remember open winters as being the exception--o=ne
in five or so.  Without the snow cover we don't reach the winter minima t=hat
we had historically.  During one of the snowy winters I reached at least =-40
F/C.  (The all time low here -53F)

I presume that Adam's weather has shifted similarly.

All this is, of course, within the realm of climactic "noise", and is
obviously proof of nothing--though it is evidence that is consistent with
the global warming hypothesis.  The scientific community is unanimous (fo=r
all intents and purposes) that human emissions are affecting climate--the
laws of physics dictate as much.  The debate is to what degree any change
that is observed is human driven.  I recently read a paper which said tha=t
human-directed CO2 increases from deforestation over the past 10,000 year=s
have slowed or prevented temperature drops that would otherwise have
occurred on Earth's merry journey toward the next ice age, and that curre=nt
"greenhouse gas" emissions may in fact be fulfilling the same function.
This would be a good thing for most people, but a bad one for me.  I'm
hoping to be able to grow most Arisaemas here--and palm trees, too.

The only two world-wide interest groups that have any serious bone to pic=k
with the concept of human-induced climate change are both foot soldiers i=n
the US Republican party war on science:  US economic interests for whom
changes in the energy economy might have the effect of changing the busin=ess
climate as well, and Biblical literalists, who reject science because it
conflicts with Genesis.  (Curiously, "Intelligent Design", an alternative=to
teaching evolution in public schools and a current buzzword in American
conservative religious politics, also completely conflicts with Genesis--=no
points for intellectual consistency there.)  Heathen environmentalism
conflicts with the imminent arrival of the End Time.  35-40% of US
fundamentalists believe the world will end within their or their children='s
lifetime, why worry about the planet at all?  ("It's your patriotic duty =to
go out and buy an SUV" says one prominent US fundamentalist preacher.)

I go in to more detail than I normally would in this forum, because Mr.
Stillwell asks the question and because I'm  not sure just how well our
overseas friends understand the source of the deep wellspring of the
ideological antipathy toward science within powerful US political groups.

This said, skepticism of all things is a good thing.  It is at the heart =of
the scientific world view, as opposed divinely revealed truth.  Is the
increase in numbers and strength of Atlantic hurricanes caused by global
warning? Are they the result of a naturally occurring cycle?  Or is the
increase in powerful storms caused by tolerance of gays and lesbians, as
another prominent US conservative religious leader says?  My own
intellectual bias--a belief in the power of the scientific method---says
let's test all three hypotheses for their predictive power, and see where
the data take us.

Keep on questioning global warning--and everything else.  We only managed=to
escape the caves and the Dark Ages because some brave folks, sometimes at
the cost of their lives,  have questioned the arrogant human belief that
there is one unchanging "Truth", whether religious or political correctne=ss.

Just my two cents,

Steve Herje, Lone Rock, Wisconsin, USA  USDA zone 3 (lately zone 4)



----- Original Message -----
From: "George R. Stilwell, Jr." <GRSJr at WORLDNET.ATT.NET>
To: <ARISAEMA-L at NIC.SURFNET.NL>
Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 4:02 PM
Subject: Re: Arisaema griffithii


> >Mediterranean climate is much gentler than the Chicago area, but ours
> >seems to be shifting radically and unpredictably as a result of global
warming.
>
> Adam,
>
> What proof do you have of this claim? Sounds like political correctness=to
me.
>
> Ray
>