Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
6 minutes ago.
by Stillhere
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

moderation

Do you really consider the opinion of a journalist to be portrayed and accepted as the opinion of an educated and accredited, field tester scholar of a scientific discipline,ithink? .Coleman, first of all was a "weatherman", with a degree in journalism.He wasn't published.He served with the Weather Channel for ONE year,only.He was a businessman,who could could do weather segments for TV.And his denouncement of GW/CG was totally political,not scientifically factual in any way. And,Happer.Well he is a physicist, but optics is his area of expertise.And he basically said that excessive co2 was a good thing for this planet. And, all of this on Tea Party stationary.

Posted 57 days ago.

Ohwiseone

I like the way you two prominent righties sit around and pat each others arses and say well done ! Maybe you two can get together and listen to Hannity sometime ! LOLOL!!!

Posted 58 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Besides the MIT climatologist is probably working off a government grant and therefore the research is skewed !

Posted 58 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Is there a scientific consensus on global warming?~~~~~~~ YES , that's so !!

www dot skepticalscience dot com/global-warming-scientific-c~~~~The tiredbrain troll doesn't like inconvenient facts !Those facts make it look ,stupid , foolish , ignorant , right-wing whack job , You pick which ever you think fits ! Or add your own !

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

Notice the snark, lol poor Harry.

Posted 58 days ago.

harryanderson

Anyway, you can continue your political-agenda discussion without me for a while. It's time to play basketball.

Posted 58 days ago.

harryanderson

I agree that the politicians and greenies like to portray catastrophe. I am in neither group.

Since I belong to neither group, I'm more focused on Lindzen's scientific opinions, and whether those are shared by his peers, than his political opinions.

That's why I don't respond to the obsession you and Ithink have with my politics. For me, it's a scientific discussion, not a political agenda.

Posted 58 days ago.

All very true, Stillhere.

The article about Coleman is out new today. I know he has been discussed before. He says no warming in over 18 years.

Good talking to you. Gonna take a break.

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

Lindzen featured in CBS News: 'The opportunities for taxation, for policies, for control, for crony capitalism are just immense, you can see their eyes bulge. Even many of the people who are supportive of sounding the global warning alarm, back off from catastophism. It’s the politicians and the green movement that like to portray catastrophe.'

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

MIT Climate Scientist Dr. Richard Lindzen: ‘The changes that have occurred due to global warning are too small to account for’ – ‘Global warming, climate change, are just a dream come true for politicians’

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

Yes ITHINK, notice the veneer of niceness is wearing off and Harry gets snarkier by the week.

Watching the scam fall apart is not easy.

Posted 58 days ago.

harryanderson

Well, Stillhere, I see you refuse to ackowledge the contradictions in your own statements.

At least Dr. Lindzen, unlike you, acknowledges some of the major mistakes he's made. The NYT reported:

"Dr. Lindzen acknowledged that the 2009 paper contained 'some stupid mistakes' in his handling of the satellite data. 'It was just embarrassing,' he said in an interview. 'The technical details of satellite measurements are really sort of grotesque.'”

h ttp://w ww.nytimes.c om/2012/05/01/science/earth/clouds-effect-on-climate-change-is-last-bastion-for-dissenters.html?pagewanted=3&_r=0

Stillhere, you seem ignorant of.basic attribution principles, so I wonder if your info came from the research that Dr. Lindzen said contains "embarrassing" "stupid mistakes."

Posted 58 days ago.

The Canadians are having a little excitement today. Our time will come. Before G W gets us.

Posted 58 days ago.

You mean he will keep on trying to scare us with his wisdom about the sky falling? Oh shoot.

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

Our LOCAL PRO SCIENCE REPUBLICAN will be ok, don't worry.

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

Not to worry ITHINK, there are some republicans that have bought into the nonsense too.

He always has his phony consensus to keep him WARM at night

The 97% consensus – a lie of epic proportions

Anthony Watts / May 17, 2013

Posted 58 days ago.

I feel so sorry for poor harry. It has to be soooo upsetting that his fellow republicans say his pet theory is a lie. I am sure he values the opinions of his fellow republicans and is hurt by this. lol

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

ITHINK they cannot do that, its their reason for being.

Posted 58 days ago.

It's over, Stillhere. The warmers should stop embarrassing themselves and slink back in to their hole.

Posted 58 days ago.

Stillhere

ITHINK as Dr Lindzen says

Once the issue is adopted, evidence becomes irrelevant

Posted 58 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or