Posted on 08/11/2007 12:25:22 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
Newsweek's global-warming cover story purports to reveal the "well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry," which for the last two decades "has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change." It's the same story run repeatedly in mainstream media: The overwhelming majority of scientists believe the debate on global warming is over -- but if there are any dissenting scientists left, they've been bought.
Here's the rub: If dissent is so rare, why do global-warming conformists feel the strong need to argue that minority views should be dismissed as nutty or venal? Why not posit that there is such a thing as honest disagreement on the science?
As for the overwhelming majority of scientists believing that man is behind global warming, former NASA scientist Roy Spencer, now at the University of Alabama, told me, "It's like an urban legend. There has never been any kind of vote on this issue." He referred me to a 2003 survey in which two German environmental scientists asked more than 530 climate scientists from 27 countries if they thought humans caused climate change: 56 percent answered yes, 30 percent said no.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
review
To the stakes. Burn them!..............Oh, wait, hmmm.......
BTW - lots of bad news for the alamists recently. NASA having to correct its temperature figures, an article in American Scientist (July/August) about why the snow melting on Kilimanjaro has very little to do with any AGW, "mainstream" atmospheric scientists questioning the the IPCC...... What is the world coming to?
The man-made global warming position is unconvincing on scientific merit; so the proponents resort to the empty argumentum ad hominem. Rather than address the substance of the scientific facts; global warmers personally attack the critics of man-made global warming. Logical fallacy works in the public mind as the public is not educated in logic.
Holy malaise Batman!
That says it all.
Paralyzing fog would be dangerous indeed.
“Paralysis” is good in this situation. If we don’t change anything, the global climate will putter along in its usual, variable way, and we’ll all die, eventually, just as we would if we did Something Terribly Drastic about “climate change.”
reminds me of hillary’s “vast global right wing conspiracy”.
whatta joke.
If that is true, then they haven't done a very good job........
Paralysis on climate change, like gridlock, is a good thing.........
BTW, I once read that if the Earth was shrunk down to the size of a billiard ball, it would be smoother than a billiard ball. Even the Grand Canyon and Pacific Basin and Himalayas wouldn’t be more than a scratch on its surface..............
Earth ball in the right pocket!
The night before last there was a FROST WARNING for North-Central Alberta (west of Fort MacMurray). This is early AUGUST. Edmonton was the same temperature (55*) as Yellowknife NWT at 8 that night.
It’s been a quite cool summer here (Vancouver Island) as well. Only 3 or 4 days of real heat, and that was in JUNE!
Global warming my fat patoot!
I swear! Regardless of which side I held on the issue of global warming, I would be insulted as a congressman or senator if I had to sit and listen to ANY airhead actor pontificate his views on the issue. What is it with Congress that they are so willing to give credence to testimony by people who have no professional expertise in the topic on which they are testifying, simply because they come from Hollywood?
Don’t they call it weather because no one knows weather it will rain or not ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.