Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Bloon Tower Defence 4

Russell Seitz mi scrive ..

I published this post last November, introducing it with a quote from an article by Russell Seitz the Wall Street Journal Europe.
Covers the torrid climate of witch-hunting (and cutting funds) in place against the scientific institutes that try to search on Global Warming (GW) in the direction of alignment " consensus" on politically correct.
Today I wrote to about Russell Seitz in person (from his biography " .. he testified before The House Committee on the Judiciary, briefed Presidential science advisors, Secretaries of the Navy, Various members of the Senate and Officials of the NSC, CIA, DEA, DIA, DOA and the Department of State. He Has Been a keynote speaker at international conferences on materials science and stategic policy. His patents include monoisotopic diamond and gradient thermochromics . "Wow! stuff that makes any Epistemes seppuku on the spot) .
He asks me to translate his comments (visible in the post mentioned) in Italian, which I do gladly.
" Sir: Although I barely read Italian, see che la sua apertura è una parte del mio articolo 'Nullius In Verba' nell'edizione Europea del Wall Street Journal, e sottintende che io non creda al fatto che stia avvenendo un innalzamento straordinario della temperatura dovuta alle attività umane. Ma, se io respingo l'operazione politica di gonfiare il cambio del clima per rappresentarlo come una catastrofe, io non posso e non ho di fatto negato l'opinione comune scientifica riguardo la realtà dell'apporto umano all'innalzamento della temperatura dovuto al CO2 e ad altri gas prodotti dalla Civiltà tecnologica.
Dato che ha messo in risalto l'antica situazione climatica della Groenlandia per respingere l'idea che la Rivoluzione Industriale rappresenti un elemento nuovo nell'equazione della climate variability, I think it is obliged to inform his readers of my other article, which supports more or less the opposite: His readers http://adamant.typepad.com/seitz/2006/10/eric_the_green_1.html
will find there the full text article 'Nulluis in verba' (sic) and some of my other writings about the "Climate Wars". I would appreciate it if you could translate this note in Italian. Sincerely, Russell Seitz
.

So I had to link it. Now my reply.

Mr.Seitz Dear, thank you very much for spending your time reading my article, and for posting the above comment translated. As you Suggested, Some misunderstanding there must be two to language barrier. In particular:
"... you suggest that I join in rejecting out of hand the premise that an extraordinary man-made rise in global temperatures is taking place .." :
I never suggested anything like that; my post is definitely NOT presented as a translation of your WSJ article, nor trying to "patronize" your opinions at all. The quote of your sentence I picked up is to underline the bad practice of cherrypicking a politically correct 'scientific truth' that's going on with regards to GW discussions - and fundings.
This, with your comment I fully translated above, should close the issue you raised; anyway, let me take the opportunity to further clarify my point, by answering to your arguments.
a) ".. I reject the political inflation of climate change into catastrophe.. " :
that's a key point we share: when "scientific consensus" slightly becomes Revealed , undisputable, Coranic Truth , then the "politically correct" basic instincts raise up, and we suddenly experience Royal Society asking Exxon to cut fundings to "Infidel" Research Institutes. Keeping everybody away from scientific evidence.
b) ".. I cannot and have not denied the scientific consensus as to the realty of .." and "... justifying the rejection .. that the Industrial revolution is a new element in the equation of climate variability. ." :
my point is NOT to deny all that; it is exactly the opposite.
In brief: we know climate cyclically fluctuates and is subject to change by many natural reasons
(in fig.: Stromboli volcano night eruption) ; now, let's assume that human techies could change the climate; well, HOW DEEP could that influence actually go? We're just hearing Kyoto's political wows about - and related growing expense reports by Scientists involved.
c) ".. another article of mine which makes quite the opposite point (on Greenland climate history) .." :
I encourage all my few readers to read your nicely written article: ".. The icy isle was colonized in the comparatively balmy centuries around the turn of the Millennium .." , and ".. by 1400 ..(Vikings were) unable to eke a living as the growing season contracted and the ice fields grew .." . These are exactly my points: climate DO change and fluctuate, in Greenland and elsewhere, and it's still changing. We're just questioning how much humans could influence a process that seems pretty intrinsic and cyclic, besides all political correctness and "scientific consensus".
Thanks for your comment, that was very welcome; it is just another sign that the "temperature" toward any sign of "politically uncorrectness" about Global Warming is growing high.

Sin qui, la replica. Considerazione: dev'essere il mio karma ("non voglio più amici/voglio solo nemici" - Tex'n duet, Litfiba 1994 , la mia preferita): bello avere "estimatori" in contatto con l'Amministrazione e il Wall Street Journal ..
Aldilà della sottile linea rossa che può separare le mie conclusioni da quelle di chi ha opinioni molto simili (e, nel caso di Mr.Seitz, dei misunderstandings in agguato), sono incoraggiato to press against the gloss (pseudo-) science. What
implicitly certifies that this time is the fault of the West, as with all threats to the planet: racist, paternalistic, antiemancipatorie, oppressive and colonialist.
We see that the persistent threat to human welfare are our bad habits, then I wonder why they want to come here from all over the rest of the world, this perverse and filthy polluted valley of tears ... ah I understand, are on a mission from Allah, want to "save us" ... It will also
I hope this fashion, as past er hole derozzono , without forcing us to tighten their belts to finance improbable, expensive measures contro i mulini a vento.
Ma oramai non si può più dire niente: siamo piombati indietro, l'idiozia social-green-peace degli anni '70 (chi ricorda il Club di Roma, i limiti dello sviluppo, Aurelio Peccei etc.?) è arrivata al potere con trenta anni di ritardo e le sue ricette decotte. Speriamo ci salvi presto, come allora, il rapido avvento di una vituperatissima nuova era di "edonismo reaganiano". Quanto siamo stati tutti bene allora ...

0 comments:

Post a Comment