...
The one main thing I like to keep in mind concerning climate change is that the science that indicates CO2 is a greenhouse gas is not in dispute by anybody(?). What is in dispute is
how much fossil release will (or has?) upset our world climate to the point of undesirability,
if at all.
I did point out earlier that
all the fossil carbon in the ground ...was obviously once
all in the atmosphere. Not quite sure what the weather was like back then.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roscoe
U.N. Scientist Rejects Nobel Prize Share, Denounces Climate Alarmism...
...I'm sure the majority (but not all) of my IPCC colleagues cringe when I say this, but I see neither the developing catastrophe nor the smoking gun proving that human activity is to blame for most of the warming we see. Rather, I see a reliance on climate models (useful but never "proof") and the coincidence that changes in carbon dioxide and global temperatures have loose similarity over time...
...It is my turn to cringe when I hear overstated-confidence from those who describe the projected evolution of global weather patterns over the next 100 years, especially when I consider how difficult it is to accurately predict that system's behavior over the next five days.
Mother Nature simply operates at a level of complexity that is, at this point, beyond the mastery of mere mortals (such as scientists) and the tools available to us...
Finish your assignment: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/matthew...unces-alarmism |
Because there is so much political backlash suddenly appearing over climate change, the first thing I do (since I've been corrected by Mike anyway
) is check the source. Directly under the "NewsBusters" website header are the words "Exposing and Combating Liberal Bias". Nice thing about conservative bias is they often actually admit it up front.
So here is a biased liberal site that tells the absolute truth (maybe
):
Science
ExxonMobil’s Tobacco-like Disinformation Campaign on Global Warming Science
UCS report finds that the oil company spent nearly $16 million to fund skeptic groups, create confusion
__________________________________________________ ______________
A new report from the Union of Concerned Scientists offers the most comprehensive documentation to date of how ExxonMobil has adopted the tobacco industry's disinformation tactics, as well as some of the same organizations and personnel, to cloud the scientific understanding of climate change and delay action on the issue. According to the report, ExxonMobil has funneled nearly $16 million between 1998 and 2005 to a network of 43 advocacy organizations that seek to confuse the public on global warming science.
Smoke, Mirrors & Hot Air: How ExxonMobil Uses Big Tobacco's Tactics to "Manufacture Uncertainty" on Climate Change (see PDF) details how the oil company, like the tobacco industry in previous decades, has
- raised doubts about even the most indisputable scientific evidence
- funded an array of front organizations to create the appearance of a broad
platform for a tight-knit group of vocal climate change contrarians who
misrepresent peer-reviewed scientific findings
- attempted to portray its opposition to action as a positive quest for "sound
science" rather than business self-interest
- used its access to the Bush administration to block federal policies and
shape government communications on global warming
__________________________________________________ _______________
It actually makes sense to me that since the tobacco lobby lied to us ...now the petroleum industry is doing the same thing with a similar pack of minions.
Unfortunately, in fighting the lie, the anti-tobacco league finally went so far as to say that the tiniest bit of tobacco smoke will kill us all ...and people smoking outside a doorway have to stand further and further away. Rrright.
A few years ago our ancestors all grew up in smokey caves and huts. I think survival of the fittest already weeded out most human light-smoke susceptibility. So, although I love fresh air, I don't mind too much if a co-worker lights up (illegally) in the locomotive cab. I personally know what the addiction is like and it is my assertion that I'm less uncomfortable with a wisp of smoke than a smoker forced to completely abstain for hours on end. A little courtesy goes both ways, whatever the absolute truth may be.
Etc.
...
Hybrid Mode
