Re: OT - Global Warming Revisited

On 1 Oct 2005 19:54:42 GMT, D Murphy <spamto154@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>Guido <reuters@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:dhmf0l$gth$1$8302bc10
>@news.demon.co.uk:
>
>> But you see in this thread arguments over sunspots, Mars, and the
>> temperature 250,000,000 years ago. For why?
>
>Because some can only see it as a black and white issue. The earth is
>warmer so it must be anthropogenic CO2 that is responsible for ALL of the
>warmth. Clearly the issue is more complex than that. Clearly there are
>other factors at work here. But for those with an agenda, it's pure black
>and white. All or none. It can't possibly be a confluence of events. Why
>bother trying to understand the confluence. We need simplistic problems
>with simple minded solutions!

And denial coupled with oil-company & winger sponsored quacks &
faith-based junk science works for you.

>The issue becomes global warming is either caused entirely by man made CO2
>or it is not.

Nope. We could paint your roof white. Would that fix the problem or
would we also have to paint you & your car?

You & yours could well end up looking like something Liberace
would love by the time we are done.
Problems solved, right?

>That is all a small mind can deal with. If you point out a
>problem with the black and white thinking you get slapped with a label and
>are stuck either in the black or the white camp. Or both, depending on
>which statement of k00k science you are taking issue with.

Which ones do you most love?

>When politics forces scientists to re-word their conclusions (the case of
>the IPCC summary reports), there is a problem. First and most obviously is
>that summary doesn't represent the true findings. Second and less obvious
>is the problem that the IPCC will not be able to attract qualified
>scientists who have no agenda. Why would a good and busy scientist dedicate
>a lot of time to the IPCC when they will just go ahead an write a summary
>based on politics rather than science?

They could be working for the shrubbie or any of your heroes ....

>Political agendas on BOTH sides have turned the issue into a cesspool of
>quackery.
>
>Here's a good article that discusses some of the issues.
>
>http://geology.about.com/library/weekly/aa061001a.htm

Other than a huge slap at the republicans, the shrubbie &
the noeocons ....?
--
Cliff
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Little green idiots cause global warming
    ... >> This was an exercise in the realm of politics, not science. ... >> Climate model output is not evidence. ... If such scientists say that there is no problem, ...
    (sci.chem)
  • Is there global warming truth?
    ... Gore has been on a roll since the Academy Awards ... In science "truth" is meant to ... In politics "truth" is often a claim made on the basis of some ... scientists in the making of public policy. ...
    (alt.politics.bush)
  • Re: Opinions on Carvin basses?
    ... actually "creation science" is a step further than "intelligent ... But "evolution is fact" is a straw man. ... science didn't get caught up in politics until the Biblical literalists ... by one of the evolution scientists in the Stein movie. ...
    (alt.guitar.bass)
  • Re: Expelled - Ben Steins Brilliant And Subversive Documentary
    ... "...the National Center For Science ... Science subordinating itself to politics? ... But isn't intelligent design merely a code phrase for creationism? ... scientists who have first-hand knowledge of this phenomenon refused to ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Science lies foully murder. The Environmental Faith is the New Fascism.
    ... That was the old, well-proven way of doing science, as formalized inter ... It no longer applies to the environment. ... removed from the spheres of both science and politics. ... It has repeatedly rewritten, or forced scientists to rewrite, ...
    (rec.audio.tubes)