The Science Is In

I let my long-time Time Magazine subscription lapse around the same time they published the Lone Polar Bear picture. They said cut back on unnecessary mailings. I've never looked back.

I took a peek at Time Online the other day. They're still on about AGW. And still up to some of the finest alarmist rhetoric this side of Mercury rising. Here's a sample: "[U.S. Energy Secretary] Chu methodically explained that the science is clear, that we're boiling the planet".

I never knew that the planet was heading for 100 degrees Celsius, but who am I to argue with a scientist?

Further on, "This earth, he concluded, is the only one we've got; it would be illogical and immoral to fry it."

I so totally agree. I can think of a lot of things we could do with the planet -- spray-paint it, decorate it with yellow ribbons, lease it to visiting aliens, but frying it would be, like, totally illogical, and, frankly, if the word isn't too old-fashioned, immoral.

Plus, I knew we were cooking the planet -- I came across that last week, but I never knew that both boiling and frying were involved. I guess it only makes sense -- water is a huge greenhouse gas polluter, and oil is, well, just plain evil -- it would have been better if all those dinosaurs had never died.

For balance and depth, I thought I should check out a second source -- so, over to Newsweek: "more of China and India—especially in the north—will broil... according to the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change".

So, Time's science expert has the Earth boiling and frying, while Newsweek's has it broiling -- do I detect a minor science tempest in a teapot brewing here?

Boiling, frying, and broiling the planet -- The Science Is In.

And that's the way the too-scared-to-breathe Ball bounces.