Global Warming – An Alternate Viewpoint – Part 2

OK, so I’m running a bit late. My apologies, life got a bit exciting…

Back to Global Warming. Why do so many people listen to the opinions of “Experts” who don’t have a clue? Let’s take Al Gore.

Al Gore

To quote the Wikipedia entry on Al Gore:

Gore enrolled in Harvard College in 1965, initially planning to major in English and write novels, but later deciding to major in government. On his second day on campus, he began campaigning for the freshman student government council, and was elected its president.

Although he was an avid reader who fell in love with scientific and mathematical theories, he did not do well in science classes in college, and avoided taking math. His grades during his first two years put him in the lower one-fifth of the class. During his sophomore year, he reportedly spent much of his time watching television, shooting pool, and occasionally smoking marijuana. In his junior and senior years, he became more involved with his studies, earning As and Bs. In his senior year, he took a class with oceanographer and global warming theorist Roger Revelle, who sparked Gore’s interest in global warming and other environmental issues. Gore earned an A on his thesis, “The Impact of Television on the Conduct of the Presidency, 1947-1969”, and graduated with an A.B. cum laude in June 1969.

Note that he’s an English Major who was lousy at Science. Now there’s nothing wrong with being an English Major, who is interested in writing. There are a lot of English Majors who have made a decent living out of writing.

My point is that he doesn’t have the skills to evaluate Global Warming theories.

Mitt Romney

During the New Hampshire Primary Mitt Romney said:

My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet. And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.

His opinion is useless. Romney holds a law degree. He hasn’t got the scientific training to evaluate the problem.

OK, now I’ve beaten up on American Politicians, how about some Canadian ones?

Stephen Harper

Stephen Harper has a degree in economics. From Wikipedia:

He attended Northlea Public School and, later, John G. Althouse Middle School and Richview Collegiate Institute, both in Central Etobicoke. He graduated in 1978, and was a member of Richview Collegiate’s team on Reach for the Top, a television quiz show for Canadian high school students. Harper then enrolled at the University of Toronto but dropped out after two months. He then moved to Edmonton, Alberta, where he found work in the mail room at Imperial Oil. Later, he advanced to work on the company’s computer systems. He took up post-secondary studies again at the University of Calgary, where he completed a bachelor’s degree in economics. He later returned there to earn a master’s degree in economics, completed in 1993. Harper has kept strong links to the University of Calgary, where he often lectured students. Harper is the first prime minister since Joe Clark without a law degree.

Another politician without the skills to evaluate the problem.

Elizabeth May

Curiously the head of the Green Party, is a lawyer. An American lawyer!

Beginning in 1980, she worked her way through Dalhousie Law School as a mature student, graduating with an LLB in 1983, with then Governor of Arkansas, Bill Clinton, writing her a letter of reference.

Again, another politician without the skills to understand the problem.

There’s nothing wrong with not having the skills

You don’t expect to call a lawyer to get your car repaired. You don’t expect to call a mechanic to get your will drawn up.

So why, oh why, would you listen to someone who doesn’t have the technical skills when they are giving you advice? Normally you wouldn’t. You’d tell them to stuff their advice somewhere very impolite. And painful.

But for some reason, we get a lot of people listening to their favorite politicians, and taking their uninformed guesses as gospel. Sorry folks. I don’t care how much you like someone – if they don’t have the skills they aren’t worth listening too.


Wayne Borean

Sunday January 19, 2014


8 thoughts on “Global Warming – An Alternate Viewpoint – Part 2

  1. “But . . . but . . . but they’re so charismatic! They MUST know all about it! Otherwise they wouldn’t say anything!”

    Bah, humbung. Just another voice, crying in the wilderness, “Prepare me my bottle, please.” First, look at the nature of the individual that’s espousing the opinions. What are they out for? Are they trying to help the human race? Or are they just out to help themselves? If it’s the latter, then the individual is nothing more than another sociopathic politician out to promote him or her self at the expence of the population. And personally, I”ve seen enough sociopathic politicians and would like to see fewer. One obvious clue to a sociopathic politician is, “Are they a career politician?” If the answer is ‘yes’, then they need to have their career derailed. They don’t want to help humanity, they just want to keep their nice cushy job with high pay and good benefits.

    Sorry about the rant. I’m afraid I’ve grown a bit disgusted with politics, lately.

    1. I can understand that, but you are a bit too cynical. I know a bunch of politicians. Al most all of them are good people. They may be mistaken in their viewpoints, and often are, but we aren’t talking Darth Vader.

      What is a bigger problem is when the General Public doesn’t think things through. That’s the point I was trying to make. Too many people listen to politicians because they agree on one topic, and therefore they regard the politician as a reliable source, when the politician is just as confused as they are!


  2. Wayne,
    Yea, I am cynical. We’ve got people running this country that haven’t a clue about what they’re doing to the economy or the people. And we’ve got people voting for them that have less of a clue, because they’ve been taught NOT to think. They’ve been taught that by their religion, by their politicians, and by the major corporations. And it’s gone on for generations, so now it’s and established and accepted procedure. And the root of all that ‘teaching’ is either money, or power, or both. Businesses buy politicians the way you’d buy apples at a grocery store. Religions dictate to politicians what morality is, and they know nothing about the subject. It’s just that the religions want THEIR narrow-minded way of life codified into law, so that everybody has to believe THEIR way. And it sickens me to see this happening. It’s gotten so that the catch-plrase in Christianity isn’t “fee my sheep”, but “Fleece my sheep”. So, yea, I’m cynical. The question is, “Am I wrong?”

  3. Wayne,
    While I agree with the premise of your article, I have to say that the cynicism expressed by tycheent is also right on target. Professional politicians are highly trained in the ways of manipulating a population to effect election, reelection and/or to condition the marketplace for whatever corporation has bought their services. They pass laws, based upon moral issues that themselves are based upon ancient traditions and mythologies. I once read a quote, source unknown, that states, “politicians should be required to wear their contributors logos on their suits, like race car drivers.”

    Global warming? Maybe, maybe not. Geologists, anthropologists, climatologists, et al, have long recorded major events that dramatically changed Earth’s environment and the evolution of thousands of species; none of which were caused my mankind’s corruption of Mother Nature’s laws. That’s not to say that mankind’s impact on the environment has not been significant. Many an animal species has gone extinct because we’ve ruined or changed their habitat, manufacturing and refinery companies have damaged their immediate environment, and of course, we are using up certain resources at a phenomenal rate without the slightest clue of how long these resources will last or what to do when they’re depleted. Sure… the pols will tell you that everything is under control, the religious leaders will assure us that it’s all part of (whatever) God’s plan and the corporations will continue to rake in the bucks.

    So, what else is new?

  4. Heh. Most “Professional Politicians” get by on little or no training. I know a bunch of them. One day, they get this urge to run for office, and from then on they are more like hamsters trapped in a hamster wheel than anything else.

    As to the science, I’ll be covering that in depth later.


  5. The problem is science is never completely settled in any area; I am by training a chemist and program computers. Most of the debate about global warming is about which computer model is the “best” when all have serious problems. The current data shows the earth has been warmer and colder before humans. Also, none of the models correctly predicted the lack of warming of the past 15 years or so. I am an experimentalist, meaning I trust the data over someone’s model. Many are seduced by fancy theoretical models which may not be accurate because they sound like we know what is going on when often we really have clue.

    1. I’ll disagree with you on that. At approximately 14 PSI water boils at 100 Degrees Celsius. The science is settled.

      To take another example, e=i/r.

      I’m going to guess you don’t disagree with either of those examples. As to Global Warming, there’s a follow up coming, that addresses your concerns about the computer models. Hope to have it up early next week.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s