Well, if only you guys actually looked at what these paid shrills say... Then you might have a different point of view...
"Lindzen -- who, according to host Paul Gigot, has accused Gore of "creat[ing] a climate of fear" and "intimidating dissenting scientists into silence on the subject" of global warming -- understated the amount of warming that has occurred and the level of scientific certainty that man has contributed to that warming.
According to data* compiled by the Climatic Research Unit, the difference between the temperature in 1907, the coolest year of the 20th century, and the temperature in 1944, the warmest year in the 20th century prior to 1983, is 0.660 degrees Celsius. According to the same data, the difference between the temperature in 1976, the coolest year since 1964, and the temperature in 2005, the second-warmest year on record (the warmest was 199
, is 0.687 degrees Celsius. The chart below, also provided by the Climatic Research Unit, illustrates that 1907-1944 and 1976-2005 were the two largest periods of warming in the 20th century:
Lindzen claimed that scientists "agree that we've probably warmed about a half-degree centigrade in the last century," adding falsely that "there is no agreement that the warming we've seen is due to man." In fact, as Media Matters for America has documented, the vast majority of climate scientists and organizations agree that human activity contributes to global warming. Further, while the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the National Academy of Sciences have said that the Earth's surface temperature has risen by approximately 0.6 degrees Celsius -- or 1 degree Fahrenheit -- in the 20th Century, these figures, by definition, do not include the years 2001 through 2005, which are five of the six warmest years on record, as the Climatic Research Unit noted in a December 2005 press release.
Media Matters previously noted that Gigot had distorted a study on methane on The Journal Editorial Report to falsely suggest it undermined global http://mediamatters.org/items/20...ms/
200605160009 -- Yes, I know you guys don't like mediamatters... but you can't dispute their citations... And that's all they do, cite... So, you can either 1) Continue your blind ingnorance, and keep destroying god's earth until you numbskulls wake up and realize the big corps hoodwinked you, but its too late... or 2) Start paying attention to what a VAST majority of scientists in the world are saying right now...
Sorry CK, but you're missing it. I don't know that Gigot is right on all of his points, but I sure like to hear some actual debate on the subject. Hysteria and political agendas have replaced common sense CK. Your global warming evangelist Gore is a joke. There is still much of the data that deserves more scrutiny and many, many more questions that have to be answered. Even then...if we conclude that the current warming trend is unnatural, what do you propose we do that will have a meaningful impact? What will China and India do? What price is too high to pay? http://www.nysun.com/article/33412
Missing it? I'm sorry, but I really doubt I'm the one missing it... Why don't you ask any global climate scientist who is NOT paid by the big corps if I'm the one missing it... Why don't you actually look at ALL of the peer reviewed studies and then tell me I'm the one missing it... That just ain't the case... It's a shame too, I mean we are only talking about the very thing that gives us existence...
Here's a challenge if you really care... Look at all the people talking about how climate change is not a problem, and then look at who is paying them now or was in the recent past... I BET YOU that you will see a really interesting pattern evolve... try it... just take a few...
And now, look at causality... Who gains from this? Al Gore? Well his reputation does go up a bit for not bowing down to corporate interests like so many in Congress and the WH have done... But does he really gain anything from railing on corporations and human activity that creates the problem? no he doesn't... He in fact loses a lot of support from the companies that can give so much to his campaign funding (that's assuming he runs)...
Now look at the guys saying he's wrong... What do they have to gain? Well that goes back to you finding who they are being paid by, or who they are currently working for...
hmm..
All I'm asking is for you to use common sense.. I know its hard since you apparently (taking a wild stab here)thought the Iraq war was going to be a good idea, and that having two oil men run our country would be good for business... But let's turn a new leaf here, start fresh, forgive our sins, and do something while we still can!!
btw: the NY Sun article is pay to play... can't do that sry...
btw: thanks for responding though ... I was a bit surprised at first... but that is respectful of you...
The earth is flat. I know Liberals claim it is round but some scientists (funded by the flat earth society) dispute this. So I think we should have a debate. I mean its not settled. Also Evolution is just a theory and I personally believe that the earth is just 37 years old. Hell thats all I can remember. Also smoking does not cause cancer because I heard a Scientist (funded by the tobacco Industry) say so.
Commenting by HaloScan
