Ya no caben dudas, el “calentamiento global”, o el “cambio climático”, es un hecho. Lo dicen todos los medios. Pero hete aquí que hace unos 30 años era posible ver el mismo consenso actual, pero en ese entonces de trataba del “enfriamiento global”, se nos venía encima la próxima glaciación (visto en Barcepundit):
While worrying about Montana's receding glaciers, Schweitzer, who is 50, should also worry about the fact that when he was 20 he was told to be worried, very worried, about global cooling. Science magazine (Dec. 10, 1976) warned of "extensive Northern Hemisphere glaciation." Science Digest (February 1973) reported that "the world's climatologists are agreed" that we must "prepare for the next ice age." The Christian Science Monitor ("Warning: Earth's Climate is Changing Faster Than Even Experts Expect," Aug. 27, 1974) reported that glaciers "have begun to advance," "growing seasons in England and Scandinavia are getting shorter" and "the North Atlantic is cooling down about as fast as an ocean can cool." Newsweek agreed ("The Cooling World," April 28, 1975) that meteorologists "are almost unanimous" that catastrophic famines might result from the global cooling that the New York Times (Sept. 14, 1975) said "may mark the return to another ice age." The Times (May 21, 1975) also said "a major cooling of the climate is widely considered inevitable" now that it is "well established" that the Northern Hemisphere's climate "has been getting cooler since about 1950."
El último ejemplar de Time que recibí está todo dedicado al Global warming!!!
ReplyDeleteOjo Luis que en 1000000 de años te va a alcanzar un sweater para pasar el invierno (si no se produce una glaciación en el medio!!)
Honestamente me parece que hay temas muuuuuucho más importantes de los cuales ocuparse: como por ejemplo cómo va a llegar al futuro dada la alarmantemente baja tasa de natalidad, o dada la amenaza de uso de bombas atómicas (Korea e Iran), o dado que aumentan las limpiezas étnicas en áfrica, etc, etc, etc...
Pero eso sí, el culpable del calentamiento global es Bush (y sus amigos de las corporations!) en cambio todos los otros temitas son "cambio chico"
Cuánta hipocresía!!!
Aca tenes uno con una solucion (holo)caustica
ReplyDeleteVíctor, justo hoy leía en Instapundit sobre este profesor que sostiene que la tierra sería un lugar mucho mejor si muriera el 90% de la población. Esto es lo que dice el autor del blog:
ReplyDeleteTOM ELIA ASKS: "Is it possible that professors and graduate students as a group are more depressed than the overall population? That's the only conclusion I can come to after reading this particular story about a University of Texas zoologist who thinks the Earth would be better off if 90% of humans died."
Given that academics' lives are generally pretty good, it's hard to see why academics should be more depressed. It's perhaps better to say that academics' negative statements get more media attention. The media tend to focus on the negative, even when it's not really there.
And people in the media have good reason to be depressed, based on their declining readership/viewership.
jajajajaja... conozco gente que lo apoyaría!! jajajaja... algunos solitarios que anhelan vivir a millas de distancia del vecino más cercano!! jajajaja... qué quieren que les diga, no vale la pena invertir media neurona en analizar estos divagues...
ReplyDelete