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
3 minutes ago.
by moderation
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

Stillhere

And HARRY as you are a slave to science why do you DENY the origins of man when it suits you>??? later

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

One thing that must be understood here, there are ALWAYS people figuring how to make a fortune from anything like this. Exxon and Shell may have pretended to change their position on AGW but that is ONLY because they have done the calculus and found a way to profit from it.

Posted 2 days ago.

harryanderson

Now we see the political agenda. Stillhere invokes Dr. Lindzen for his scientific expertise. Then, he discovers that some of Dr. Lindzen’s scientific statements disagree with Stillhere’s political agenda. So he starts to ignore his former guru, Lindzen, and instead focus on a reporter’s perceived politics.

And this happens each time a counter climate changer tries to get into the scientific area. Like Joe Bast of Heartland said, “We've won the public opinion debate, and we've won the political debate as well, but the scientific debate is a source of enormous frustration."

Later, kiddies.

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

20 years later the ozone hole is STILL THERE, but if we hadn't banned CFCS it would have been worse right>???

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

Of course ITHINK, but the goal is to get some govt action and then claim that it would have been worse without it, much like the OZONE hole that is STILL there by the way,

Posted 2 days ago.

Desperation time for them, Stillhere. They will never prove man made global warming. A useless waste of time.

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

You are free to believe who you chose to believe but don't tell ME what stands and what does not, you are way above your pay grade here.

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

I do enjoy it when you say something STANDS like you are the judge and jury, lol ok you can say you buy it, but that is a long way from TRUTH

Posted 2 days ago.

harryanderson

And again, I didn't post Gillis' opinion. I posted Lindzen's opinion. If you can show where Lindzen has disavowed what Gillis reported, let's hear it.

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

Gillis is a partisan and an activist, PERIOD, you cannot put lipstick on that pig Harry, nice try

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

National Public Radio's Fresh Air hosted the New York Times' most apocalyptic environmental reporter Justin Gillis Thursday to discuss his "Temperature Rising" series in the Times. Gillis again compared global warming skeptics to creationists.

Posted 2 days ago.

harryanderson

It won't work, Stillhere. You can't erase what Lindzen told Gillis with your political opinions of Gillis. If you can demonstrate that Gillis wasn't truthful, do so. Otherwise, his report stands.

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

Gillis is a HACK of a journalist and an activist, NO SOUP FOR YOU, his opinions are very biased and not based on any level of expertise.

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

Of another prominent skeptic, Gillis wrote, 'I sense you've got him in a trap here ... can't wait to see it sprung.' -- 'Texas A&M email production shows the academics actually forwarding their email discussions...To New York Times reporters, for example. They even often copy reporters on the very exchanges they otherwise insist represent an intellectual circle that must remain free from violation by prying, nonacademic eyes. Awkward'

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

‘Collusion’: Emails expose NYT reporter Justin Gillis ‘as an activist posing as a journalist, sneering at [MIT's]Lindzen’

Posted 2 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Reality meet tiredbrain troll who doesn't believe you exist !

Posted 2 days ago.

Stillhere

Pot meet kettle

Posted 2 days ago.

moderation

Your insulting behaviors are pathetic and immature,ithink.

Posted 2 days ago.

moderation

He brought forth no evidence, ithink.His case was merely political.And you signed off on it.Did you actually read his effort?Do you tell your children they can't have an opinion until they are degreed at least at a bachelors' level.Did the mention of the tea party offend you?

Posted 2 days ago.

harryanderson

Here's a tidbit to further demonstrate that Gillis' article is not an opinion piece. The conservative Weekly Standard calls Gillis a "science writer."

"As the science writer Justin Gillis explained in a 2012 New York Times piece, Lindzen 'says the earth is not especially sensitive to greenhouse gases because clouds will react to counter them, and he believes he has identified a specific mechanism. On a warming planet, he says, less coverage by high clouds in the tropics will allow more heat to escape to space, countering the temperature increase.'”

ht tp://w ww.weeklystandard.co m/articles/what-catastrophe_773268.html?page=3

So your opinion, Stillhere, that the NYT news story is an "opinion piece," is apparently not shared by one of the country's most credible and respected (in my opinion) conservative publications.

Posted 2 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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