Scientists perform experiments more to disprove hypotheses than to confirm them; in this way, only those hypotheses with merit survive. But their professional skepticism makes it easy to cherry-pick odd data or isolated research to make it look as if there is an actual dispute among climate scientists, and doing so has evolved into a cultural meme.

32 national academies of science concur: anthropogenic climate change is real. Rigorously peer-reviewed science is available by the ream. But for some reason the media seem to think the story needs to be artificially “balanced” by finding “the other side,” thereby reinforcing the meme. In this sense, McLuhan was right: the medium BECOMES the message, and the message (erroneous) is that there is legitimate debate.

For some reason, people seem to forbear a climate debate, while none would endure a debate between a geographer and a flat-Earther, or an obstetrician and a storkist. Would they also mandate that discussions of the Holocaust include Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for “balance?”

I suppose in any field it might be possible to find one or two well educated people whose world view taints their science or amps-up their cognitive dissonance. For example, Dr. Kurt Wise is a Harvard-trained geologist and member of the Geological Society of America, but he’s also a “young Earth creationist” who swears the planet is just 6,000 years old and that the Flintstones was nonfiction. His credentials are impeccable, but he’s still delusional.

There might be one or two like him on the GW denial side, but they’re easy to spot. They’re the ones at the conference reception standing off by themselves.

The central intellectual dishonesty in the GW debate is the debate itself.

This may not mean much in the larger scheme of things, but most honest oldsters believe that the climate is now more variable.

But, of course, the weather was absolutely catastrophic in the 1930s and most now believe that the severe drought was exacerbated by plowing under hundreds of thousands of square miles of prairie grass, leaving bare soil for the “Dust Bowl.”

Of these two things I’m certain:

I. Using less fuel per person can hardly be a bad thing (and driving an SUV is hardly virtuous) Less oil revenue-related conflict plus cleaner air* are good things, right?

II. The snows of Kilimanjaro ARE disappearing–but it’s pretty tough to say just where that water vapor went, isn’t it?

*Roy, I’ve got a little 50 mpg diesel and I’m ready (mostly) for your algae !

I heard that there was an arrest today (Saturday) in the murder of agent Rosas.

There is some serious talk now in California about legalizing marijuana,
in order to tax it because the state is running a major deficit and issuing IOU’s instead of checks to it’s creditors. But folded into the idea is an alleviation of demand for illegal marijuana imported by the cartels of course.

However I believe they traffic in other drugs also, which are not on the table for legalization anywhere in the U.S.

The U.S. has put a lot of effort in the last 10 years in patrolling the border better – more agents I believe, new surveillance technologies and of course the fence they started building. Obviously it’s not nearly enough interdiction at this point. What a mess…

STATEMENT BY HOMELAND SECURITY SECRETARY JANET NAPOLITANO ON THE DEATH OF BORDER PATROL AGENT
ROBERT ROSAS

“I am deeply saddened by the tragic death of one of our own. Agent Robert Rosas was gunned down while protecting our nation’s Southwest border. This act of violence will not stand—nor will any act of violence against the Border Patrol. I have directed that the full resources of the Department assist in the investigation to find and bring to justice those responsible for this inexcusable crime.

“My thoughts and condolences are with Agent Rosas’ family and his fellow agents at this difficult time. I want to commend those in the law enforcement and first responder community in Southern California for so quickly responding to the scene and attempting to save Agent Rosas’ life. His death is a vivid reminder that we are engaged in a serious effort to secure our border and that thousands of Border Patrol agents and other DHS employees risk their lives every single day to protect and defend our nation.”

Parts of Mexico now rank among the most dangerous in the world. However, this isn’t some nameless African state, it is a major US trading partner, a member of NAFTA, the world’s eleventh largest economy by GDP at purchasing power parity and a popular tourist destination for westerners. What has precipitated this absolute collapse in the security situation in great chunks of the country? The Cause: Drugs. Simply put, the operation of the drug cartels in Mexico is responsible for almost bringing Mexico to its knees.
The Tijuana cartels are not bit-players. A couple of days ago in Tijuana, a member of the El Teo cartel was arrested while carrying drugs, guns, jewelry and $3.6 MILLION US Dollars CASH. I mean really, can you imagine walking around Tijuana with $3.5 million dollars cash? Surreal.
Well, welcome to TJ! And thanks for asking…Dawna

First I’ve heard of trying to manipulate hurricane strength with cold water – good post. Supposedly man has made recent hurricanes more intense artificially via global warming, so wouldn’t this be one way to reverse that in a small area? Wouldn’t we be also cooling the waters (if real) with a human intervention of reducing carbon emissions?

These are vexing questions… ;^)

I’m skeptical however that anyone could possibly transport & drop, or cool & pump from a ship on location or something, enough cold water to make a significant dent in ocean temperature. I’d like to see that demonstrated.

But WHAT IF, man could minimize hurricane intensity or path with a strategic douse of cold water in the superheated portion of water energizing the hurricane? Should he/she do it??

If man did not want hurricane damage on their structures, (like a rich person with a private island) should they try to halt or minimize the intensity of the hurricane if they could? What would be the impact of purposeful mitigation of hurricanes? I personally don’t think man should mess with Mother Nature that way, but here’s what I heard is afoot…

I heard today that Bill Gates, with some weather expert scientists, and computer software tracking system he is developing, will track projected path of the hurricane, predicting where it will intensify and analyze the landmass about to take the brunt, and ??? before it gets to land to cause damage, add cold water to the reduce the intensity before it hits land. The hottest water areas which would have energized the hurricane would then be cooled enough to gentle the storm. The Gates software would determine which areas of water are the most heated and would likely intensify the force(say in the Caribbean or Gulf of Mexico by Jamaica for example). After figuring out the most heated water area which would intensify the force of the hurricane, they look at the land damage anticipated, say south of the Florida keys, add cold water, and PRESTO, a gentle misty rain storm instead of Hurricane Andrew.
I don’t like it, even if it works, but what do YOU think????

(As I write, now I’m sitting in a drought here in Tijuana, so that cool water sounds like it could be of better use here than dumped in the Gulf of Mexico in front of a hurricane. In fact, I’m kind of missing a blustery rain storm right about now. :)