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 hours ago.
by Ohwiseone
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

I am always amazed at how they can be so convinced of something that is unproven even by those that advocate it. Its very personal with these types, and I have yet to put my finger on why. The level of bitterness they bring is quite clear but a rational person would have to wonder why.

Posted 29 days ago.

Stillhere

And they ARE socialists, some like Myth are just not bright enough to realize the ultimate end to their goals.

Posted 29 days ago.

Stillhere

The failed models and predictions are catching up to them, the artic was supposed to be ice free by now or have you forgotten> They really are desperate and getting nastier by the day as the plan falls apart. The American people don't care about their phony crisis despite the daily media blitz. That must really stink for the socialist warmers

Posted 29 days ago.

Stillhere

Notice the snark , oh Harry, the veneer is coming off.

Posted 29 days ago.

Stillhere

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

Posted 29 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 29 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 29 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 29 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 29 days ago.

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

Posted 29 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 29 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 29 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 29 days ago.

Stillhere

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

Posted 29 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 29 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 29 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 29 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 29 days ago.

Stillhere

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

Posted 29 days ago.

Ohwiseone

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

Posted 29 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

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