SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Solon who wrote (47675)2/28/2014 9:29:19 PM
From: Greg or e1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Brumar89

  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 69300
 
Melanie Phillips Takes Aim at That "Settled Science"

A "denier" who is not yet being sued by hockey stick graphologist Michael Mann writes:

AGW [Anthropogenic Global Warming--a.k.a. da humans gone and done it!] is a
scam. There is no credible scientific evidence to show any change in the global
pattern of normal climate fluctuation over the centuries, and nothing to tie
this non-existent change to increases in carbon dioxide. The global climate has
been flat-lining for more than a decade while carbon dioxide levels have
continued to rise.

Contrary to the myth-makers, there are many
hundreds of eminent scientists who say the AGW theory is wholly without
foundation. The so-called ‘evidence’ for AGW, some of which has been shown to be
an outright fraud, has been mostly produced by dodgy computer modelling
based on dodgy data producing dodgy predictions which are an affront to science.
It is produced by researchers who are either ideological zealots for whom the
actual evidence of declining global temperatures has to be hidden; who
know that grant-funding or professional advancement is conditional upon their
‘research’ producing conclusions that support AGW theory;
or who are
third-rate minds who go along with either or both of the above without even
realising what’s happening...


Now, that's what I call an effective slapshot. (She shoots; she scores!)

Posted by scaramouche at 8:03 AM



To: Solon who wrote (47675)3/1/2014 2:01:52 AM
From: Greg or e1 Recommendation

Recommended By
Brumar89

  Respond to of 69300
 
Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore testifies to Congress about global warming


Investors Business Daily has a story to go with the 5-minute testimony.

Excerpt:

A Greenpeace co-founder testified in Congress on Tuesday about global warming. What he said is hardly what anyone would expect.

Patrick Moore came off as a raving denier.

“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” said Moore, who was testifying before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight.

“If there were such a proof, it would be written down for all to see. No actual proof, as it is understood in science, exists.”

Moore is somewhat famous for leaving Greenpeace, a large environmentalist organization that grew from a small activist group he belonged to in 1971 while earning his doctorate in ecology. He quit in 1986 because it had become too political and strayed away from the science he believed was its institutional strength.

Moore didn’t hold back in his Senate appearance. He quickly zeroed in on the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and strongly scolded it for claiming there is a “95-100% probability” that man “has been the dominant cause of” global warming. Those numbers, he said, have been invented.

He also characterized the IPCC’s reliance on computer models as futile; told senators that history “fundamentally contradicts the certainty that human-caused CO2 emissions are the main cause of global warming”; and noted that “during the Greenhouse Ages,” a period that precedes our fossil-fuel burning civilization, “there was no ice on either pole and all the land was tropical and subtropical from pole to pole.”

Moore further crossed the line of accepted climate change discourse when he insisted “that a warmer temperature than today’s would be far better than a cooler one” and reminded lawmakers “that we are not capable, with our limited knowledge, of predicting which way” temperatures “will go next.”

To with that testimony, here’s an article from Forbes magazine (Feb 2013) about the real scientific consensus on global warming.

Excerpt:

Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

The survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.

According to the newly published survey of geoscientists and engineers, merely 36 percent of respondents fit the “Comply with Kyoto” model. The scientists in this group “express the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause.”

I have been listening to Hugh Hewitt’s radio show a lot in the evenings to keep up with Russian troop movements near Ukraine, because I frankly think that the dictator Putin has been eyeing our defense cuts and licking his chops at our diplomatic weakness. When Putin hears our Secretary of State go out there and declare that a major threat to national security is global warming, that doesn’t exactly discourage him from aggression.

It’s junk science. It conflicts with observations. It’s pushed by scientists to get more grant money. It’s pushed by socialists to get more control. Period.

Share this: