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
2 days ago.
by Kendall78
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

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

Posted 282 days ago.

Ohwiseone

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

Posted 282 days ago.

Stillhere

Pot meet kettle

Posted 282 days ago.

moderation

Your insulting behaviors are pathetic and immature,ithink.

Posted 282 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 282 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 282 days ago.

harryanderson

Stillhere,

Your criticism of the article I posted doesn't hold water for several reasons.

1. You mistakenly referred to it as an "opinion piece," when it was published in hard news under science; it wasn't published in the op-ed section, So calling it an opinion piece is nothing more than your opinion,

2. Even if Gillis believes the science, he doesn't give his say so in this article.

3, The only opinions to which I referred were the opinions of Lindzen, Do you deny any of those opinions are Lindzen's?

Your criticism falls flat. You want to talk about Gillis, not what Lindzen told him.

Posted 282 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Of course you are ... That type of non-empirical data cant be vetted for accuracy ! Just the thing when you want to pump crap and not be suspect !How utterly right-wing of you !

Posted 282 days ago.

hey mod, if John Coleman lacks the credentials you feel a common sense meteorologist should have, tell us the degrees you hold which make you qualified to post with such authority on the same subject.

Personally I am not impressed as much with degrees as I am with intelligent scholarship and self education.

Posted 282 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Well ..... we are waiting !!!!

Posted 282 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Who is going to make money and how are they earning it ,by warning folks that we need to take care of our planet ?

Posted 282 days ago.

Stillhere

I assume the nyt opinion piece you reference was by Justin Gillis, an activist journalist

The New York Times's confessed climate activist (and journalist) Justin Gillis made Tuesday's front page with a 2,500-word story on what he called the last line of defense for climate change skeptics: "Clouds' Effect on Climate Change Is Last Bastion for Dissenters."

Gillis, a true believer, proudly told the Columbia Journalism Review in April that it was a "scandal" the media was failing to connect the dots between "weird weather" events and permanent climate change, and compared climate-change skeptics to people who don't believe in evolution.

Posted 282 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Yes , and you know what the definition of faux is in French ? It fits perfectly !

Posted 282 days ago.

mythravere

Ohwiseone you do know what the pronunciation of Faux is right?

It sounds like Fo or Foe.

Posted 282 days ago.

harryanderson

Ohwiseone, I wish you'd stop with the name-calling. It isn't helpful.

Posted 282 days ago.

harryanderson

I have faith in our system, and I believe the nonpolitical problem-solvers will shove the lying politicians aside, roll up their sleeves, and fix it. It's already happening with some of our biggest, most hard-headed institutions like Exxon, Shell, and the Dept. of Defense.

Posted 282 days ago.

Ohwiseone

The tiredbrain troll has run out of material from Faux and apparently has to go get more info from its masters !

Posted 282 days ago.

harryanderson

Al Gore apparently misled people with his movie. I say " apparently" because I haven't seen it. He's a politician, and he seems to think a catastrophe is coming unless we enact his political agenda.

My review of the science causes me to disagree with the gloom-and-doom political-agenda bunch. I agree with the CEO of Exxon, who said, "It's an engineering problem with an engineering solution."

So I'm optimistic. We*****at politics, but we're great engineers.

If the politicking doesn't prevent the engineering, we'll be fine.

Posted 282 days ago.

harryanderson

Dr. Lindzen " has had difficulty establishing his case in the scientific literature," so he has taken it to the political arena.

Unfortunately, political-agenda discussions are the places we least expect to find truth. Whether they be on the right or on the left, politicians lie.

Posted 282 days ago.

harryanderson

Dr. Lindzen agrees with global warming GHG's, but predicts They will cause little harm because fewer cirrus clouds will allow more AGW heat to escape.

However--

"Today, most mainstream researchers consider Dr. Lindzen’s theory discredited. He does not agree, but he has had difficulty establishing his case in the scientific literature."

Posted 282 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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