That's ok, it might burn a little, but that will win you an Oscar!
"Nowhere in the traditionally refereed scientific literature do we find any support for Gore’s hypothesis. Instead, there’s an unrefereed editorial by NASA climate firebrand James E. Hansen, in the journal Climate Change — edited by Steven Schneider, of Stanford University, who said in 1989 that scientists had to choose “the right balance between being effective and honest” about global warming — and a paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that was only reviewed by one person, chosen by the author, again Dr. Hansen."
Continued
15 comments:
No one can say that the global warming skeptics don't get their say at The Aurora. A moment's googling reveals that Michaels is the Chief Editor for the "World Climate Review," a newsletter on global warming funded by the Western Fuels Association.
Ho hum.
Maybe you should have taken a moment to google the source of funding for the Pew Research Center that you have defended here. It seems to me that big bad oil is only big and bad in your eyes when they differ with you ideologically.
You cant address the issues that the "skeptics" make so you attack their motive whereas the fact is that argument is weak feeble and has already been debunked.
Yeah thats right...debunked.
...and for the record, Kennedy deserved it.
I suppose it is just a coincidence that apparently ALL of the skeptics are funded by big oil and energy interests. Is there not one scientist with integrity that does not receive such funding who has been persuaded by their arguments?
again with the ad hominem attacks.
Lets forget the author of the article for a minute and address the contents.
The scientist that gore uses ADMITS TO BE LYING
Well, we might start with the whole quote: "Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest. I hope that means being both."
Please explain to me why the rest of the quote is relevant? I hope for a lot of things but this guy thinks it's ok to lie about the danger in order to do what he believes is right. algore obviously thinks so too
Under the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s medium-range emission scenario for greenhouse gases, a rise in sea level of between 8 and 17 inches is predicted by 2100. Gore’s film exaggerates the rise by about 2,000 percent.
Gary if you are indeed correct that all these scientists that doubt man made climate change or as you call them... skeptics, if their professional opinions are discredited as a result of their recieving funding from Satan, I mean Exxon then by using your same logic wouldnt Al Gore's position be the most discredited of them all, considering that he has recieved significantly more monetary compensation from Communist "We Dont Give A Hoot" China then most of these "skeptics" combined.
But Im sure that Al Gore's integrity is beyond reproach and his moral authority is absolute as he would never deal in favors for funding. Right? Well that is unless you consider giving China an exemption from Kyoto and consistently siding with China in their blame game of the USA as the main culprits of "global warming" despite overwhelming evidence that China and India are the fastest growing polluters on the planet.
In other words... you and the algore you rode in on are full of shit.
The Skeptical Environmentalist is my eco bible. I have yet to meet a devotee of the religion of global warming who didn't lack common sense in a lot of other catagories. I tend to discount the opinions of people who are stupid enough to think that gay men should take teen boys on camping trips. That's a disqualifier for me, right there. It shows a lack of critical thinking skills. If I ever meet a liberal who would up and say, "Hmm maybe gay men should not be scout leaders," I would kiss em, even Anita (she oftens shows an independence of thought not often found among liberals here in the Bay Area). But I won't hold my breath.
I am always amazed by you so-called Conservatives. Al Gore being paid by Communist China, gay scout masters--do you think if you throw out enough horse shit some of it will stick?
Horse shit?
Then could you please enlighten us ignant conservatives as to why Kyoto (authored by Gore) inexplicably left out two of the fastest growing industrial nations in the world?
Could you also rebut my allegations of Gore being on China's payroll?
Didnt think so....
If you dont think the two are linked then you are naive.
And Miss C is right, and I would add that they should not coach youth sports teams either.
Gay ACLU Little League
To quote more of Dr. Hansen:
Emphasis on extreme scenarios may have beenappropriate at one time, when the public and decision-makers were relatively unaware of theglobal warming issue, and energy sources such as “synfuels”, shale oil and tar sands were
receiving strong consideration. Now, however, the need is for demonstrably objective climate
forcing scenarios consistent with what is realistic under current conditions. Scenarios that
accurately fit recent and near-future observations have the best chance of bringing all of the
important players into the discussion, and they also are what is needed for the purpose of
providing policy-makers the most effective and efficient options to stop global warming."
(http://www.sciam.com/media/pdf/hansen.pdf)
I would interpret his statements as saying that the more exteme scenarios (scientists usually giving a low, medium, and high range of estimates) may have served a purpose in alerting the media and the politicians to the crisis and galvanizing them into action.Scientists are naturally a cautious bunch, qualifying their conclusions in terms of both doubts and probabilities.
Ironically, conservatives such as yourself, by making it less likely that anything will be done about the problem, make the extreme scenarios more likely.
Gary if you cant see why rational people, conservative and liberal alike would not fall prey to such scaremongering tactics as Hansen described above than it may be too late for you.
Its the "boy that cried wolf" scenario all over again (and again and again) with these "cautious" scientific types.
If you really want to save the world I would suggest that you become an organ/wool donor so that we can cloth the poor when you pass. Baaaa!
I live on the second floor so I can look down on the rest of you when the sea levels rise.
Well then wear a helmet jackass cuz Im on the 44th.
Son of a bitch. How could I let a Luka joke slip by like that.
Post a Comment