[dila813]

I am still reading this, but it is good so far.

[Noob1999]

I guess this will have the scientists in more trouble than the centuries old Christian fight between strict bible believers, and Darwin evolvers.

This issue has become the modern day equivalent to what Darwin faced in the 1860’s!

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Pretty well every aspect of our lives in today's industrialised society involves emitting carbon dioxide - and short of some technological revolution as yet undreamed of, the only way we could meet that target would be to close almost every part of our economy. Yet, astonishingly, scarcely a single MP even questioned the need for such a law; only three voted against it.

I wonder how much of the millions in research grants was used to bribe those MPs?

[Kirkwood]

You're too generous to call them scientists. They are charlatans.

[Asfarastheeastisfromthewest...]

In Eisenhower's farewell address, his reference to the 'military-industrial complex' is the one that always seems to be remembered first. However, just a few sentences further, he offers another serious warning.....Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite. Sounds quite apropos to what has been going on with those fraudsters at the IPCC and their climategate.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[JLS]

Yeah that is a powerful article.

[DrDavid]

On every side we are told that 'the science is settled', that '2,500 of the world's top climate scientists' agree that these terrifying predictions will all come true unless we take the most drastic action. So carried away have they all been by this belief that scarcely a single politician dares question it.

Science does not follow parliamentary rules. Conclusions should be based on the facts. Frequently, it takes years to find all the relevant facts. There is no group of scientists that can sit down and argue and the prevailing side ends up with the wining law of nature. For me the most annoying one is "Calling the Question" to end debate. This just does not work in science, because it would abort the scientific method.

[HiTech RedNeck]

“Debunking climate change” might not be the most elegant phrase. Surely this old globe has had its share of ice ages and other such stuff; I believe “debunking anthropogenic climate change” would be a better way of putting it.