Given all the absurd assumptions about man-made "global warming," it was inevitable someone would suggest that recent earthquakes and now Iceland's ash-belching volcano might have some correlation to climate change.
And yet such nonscientific nonsense from the media -- surely they must know of the science they speak -- draws believers to the church of global warming much like a carnival sideshow attracts local yokels.
In an interview with CNN senior State Department producer Elise Labott, NPR's Diane Rehm raised the question of "human involvement" in recent geologic calamities. To which Ms. Labott eagerly played the global warming card, given all the "wacky weather ... that's just a microcosm for what's happening around the world."
Except no one has proven that extreme weather is linked in any way to greenhouse gas emissions (although CO2 always gets blamed -- except when temperatures plummet). Now the same climate changes above ground might somehow affect the movement of Earth's tectonic plates and/or magma flow miles below?
Even in his best doomsday mode, Ozone Al Gore would have trouble selling that pitch. Yet some bloggers are buying this bilge, likening the scenario to a horse that swats flies with its tail.
Indeed. This is precisely the stuff of global warming that draws flies.
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments â either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.