A Naturalistic Fairy Tale-Part XXX

And because we know that you may be less than appropriately scared about global warming we do now turn to what we have discovered from history. We ask that you not be distracted by Climategate, and listen carefully to what we have to tell you about the past.

We did discover a fossil in Antarctica of an animal that lived 252 million years ago.1 It was during the time when Pangea was whole, and the volcanoes did emit high amounts of greenhouse gasses. This gasification of the Earth did produce catastrophic global warming resulting in the death of 80-95 percent of life in the oceans and on land (Praise Science).

So, we do imagine that this fossil is of an animal that had no fur and “probably laid eggs.” We imagine it on the line between reptiles and mammals. We did find some related fossils in Africa, and therefore pieced together that these animals migrated south and lived with other animals that were probably the ancestors of mammals.

The team’s findings, published in the journal Naturwissenschaften, may offer insights into potential survival techniques for modern day animals threatened by climate change .

“Countless species are threatened by global warming today,” said Frobisch. “A prime example of a threatened species is the polar bear, whose habitat becomes increasingly smaller as a result of melting sea ice in the Arctic Circle.”

“However,” he added, “it is questionable whether the polar bear or other threatened animals can respond in the same way as Kombuisia did in the Permian, simply because human activities severely limit the animals’ possibilities.”

He concluded: “The primary lesson we should learn from the studies of extinction due to climate change in the past is that it is of utmost importance today to control and reverse human induced global warming by taking counteractive measures, such as greatly reducinggreenhouse gas emissions.”

Anyway, the animals and fossils are irrelevant, because the point is, if we don’t act soon, we’ll all be dead in a couple hundred years (Praise Science). Please don’t give up on being terrified of the environment, because Mother Earth is very angry at what you are doing to her. She will punish and probably kill you if you don’t straighten up and curtail your gaseous emissions.

1) Ancient animals escaped warming in Antarctica

Advertisements

6 Responses

  1. She will punish and probably kill you if you don’t straighten up and curtail your gaseous emissions.

    Does this mean, then, that I must give up refried beans and sauerkraut and pork? “lions, tigers and bears, OH MY!!!” “The sky is falling, the sky is falling…” etc etc

  2. Yes DB! You should stay away from all of that. She hates emitters!! 😉

  3. CS: “Mother Earth is very angry at what you are doing to her. She will punish and probably kill you if you don’t straighten up and curtail your gaseous emissions.’

    The actual cause of death, the weapon of Mother Earth, however, will be other people.

    What are they fighting about in Darfur? Oil? Tribal revenge. Pshaw. The people whose water is going away from climate change are moving in on the people who still have water. Killing them to get their water. Unrest in Bangladesh? Those who live on the coast are suffering salt infiltration of their croplands. They are moving inland. Where? To land that is not yet brackish. But other people leve there, and they’d like to keep their propery. Largely unnoticed, but very real, are diplomatic tensions between Canada, Russia, Norway, Denmark, and the US—over what? Over rights to oil and gas that melting polar ice now makes it feasible to extract. Melting glaciers at the Third Pole (the Himalayas) have decreased the water that supplies one third of the world’s population. Already, several proposed water-diversion projects in western China have aroused conflicts with India. California, Nevada, and Arizona will probably never go to war against each other, but water rights have been a source of angry contention for decades. (Lake Mead now holds only half as much water as it did when Hoover dam was built.)

    So global warming isn’t all about temperature as such. From a human perspective, much of the problem is usable water.

    It’s not the heat that will kill us. We’ll kill each other to get enough water and other resources.

    If this had happened slowly, as in past eras, evolution would have time to forge adaptations and new species. But this one is too fast.

    The irony is, of course, that curing global warming would also lead to other benefits. The obstacle is the near-term cost–the mountain range that we must cross to get to the lush valley on the other side. The longer we wait, the higher the mountains become.

    If we wait too long to cross over, we’re dead. Not the Earth. The Earth will recover. But there will be no more humans. The dinosaurs didn’t die off because they couldn’t adapt; They died off because they were at the top of the food chain. Today, we’re the ones at the top of the food chain.

    Think about it. Will your grandchildren live to curse your memory?

  4. I believe it’s been shown that CO2 level is a shadow stat of temperature, lagging behind about 800 years or so. It doesn’t cause temperature change. And elevated CO2 levels are very beneficial toward increasing plant growth and enabling it where it might not otherwise be possible.

    The data we have is either cooked, incomplete, inconclusive or dead accurate. Shouldn’t matter one way or the other. “Global Warming” means nothing. Who cares whether it’s real or not? Or if it’s man-caused or not? Pollution is what we need to concentrate on. Clean up the joint and if the earth is going to heat up all by itself, so be it. Passing legislation based on “global warming” fear is idiotic. Passing legislation to stop pollution is the right approach. I’m all for crossing the mountain range to get to the valley, but lets make sure we know which mountain we are crossing. I plan to buy an electric car and install solar panels. I keep my oil-heated home at 60 degrees. Yeah, man, bring on those high gas prices!! We got to get people pissed to the point where enough will demand change! Corporate funneling of funds spent on increasing oil profits instead of green energy research will do that just fine! But let’s do what we know how to do – that is, be good stewards of the earth. Stop toxifying it. That should be the goal. *Not* to try to reduce the planetary temperature over some hypothetical time span by a half-degree based on “global warming” buzz-word propaganda.

    If this had happened slowly, as in past eras, evolution would have time to forge adaptations and new species. But this one is too fast.

    Logic. Hole. Drive Truck Through. Wouldn’t killing for natural resources be naturally expected in Darwinist thought? Especially of the selfish-gene variety? Looks like evolution is working just fine, or did you have your own pet theory of what exactly evolution *actually is* in mind? Perhaps punctuated equilibrium will come to the rescue…

    Yeah, I know, I’m an idiot.

  5. So global warming isn’t all about temperature as such. From a human perspective, much of the problem is usable water.
    ….
    If this had happened slowly, as in past eras, evolution would have time to forge adaptations and new species. But this one is too fast.

    One could just as easily argue that living in a greenhouse will result in a bigger food and water supply. The truth is that we do not know and those who do claim knowledge tend to be the charlatans of our time. In another time Al Gore would have been a corpulent bishop roaming the countryside selling indulgences for sins, his charlatanism is merely modernized.

    The irony is, of course, that curing global warming would also lead to other benefits.

    Perhaps it could stop the coming Ice Age.

    (Get Out the Ear Muffs: New Ice Age Forecast
    The New York Times; Nov. 11, 1956, pg. 40)

    (Science, Worrying About a New Ice Age by Walter Sullivan
    The New York Times; Feb 23, 1969, pg. E10)

    (Scientists Ask Why World Climate Is Changing: Major Cooling May Be Ahead by Walter Sullivan
    The New York Times; May 21, 1975, pg. 45)

    (New Ice Age by 1995? by Larry Ephron
    The New York Times; Jul. 1988, pg. A16)

    The obstacle is the near-term cost–the mountain range that we must cross to get to the lush valley on the other side.

    Is the lush valley like a “greenhouse”? Or is it that living in a greenhouse is good but greenhouse gases are bad?

    The longer we wait, the higher the mountains become.

    False prophets have always claimed knowledge of biblical proportions on the way to the lush promised land and so on. Of course a true prophet would do the same, so who can tell the difference? It seems to me that it may be possible to recognize false prophets claiming scientia/knowledge by non-scientific means. For instance, looking at the proto-Nazi tendencies of many environmentalists, the animal rights movement and so on (note the rejection of animal sacrifice central to the Jewish ethos and so on) perhaps many are merely false prophets like the pagans of old.

    If we wait too long to cross over, we’re dead.

    We’re dead anyway as Mother Earth seems to have Münchausen syndrome by proxy and thermodynamics indicates that the death of the human race is inevitable*, although some seem to be dead in the head already.

    *As I recall Jesus said that this would not happen before He returned.

  6. More on the false prophets of science:
    http://sppiblog.org/news/what-is-science-without-religion

    the must-watch video referred to in the article is here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzkB5DuveDE

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: