Re: OT - Global Warming Revisited

Cliff <Clhuprich@xxxxxxx> wrote in
news:46b0k1t7igm4hiqghov160p72l38974vti@xxxxxxx:

> 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.

Exactly the type of thing I'm talking about.

>
>>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?

Reading comprehension problems again. You snip one line and make out of
context remarks. Such a brilliant wit.

>
>>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?

You really aren't reading and understanding any of this are you?

>
>>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 ....

You're my hero, Cliff Clewless.

<http://www.brewsterrockit.com/meet_crew.htm>

>
>>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 ....?

Confused again? Try reading and comprehending the post in its entirety,
instead of one line at a time while injecting prejudice into it.


--

Dan

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT - Global Warming Revisited
    ... >which statement of k00k science you are taking issue with. ... >the IPCC summary reports), there is a problem. ... >scientists who have no agenda. ... >based on politics rather than science? ...
    (alt.machines.cnc)
  • Re: AMDs well may be running dry
    ... one that the IPCC consists of scientists and non scientists ... that there was a majority of pro GW appointees to the IPCC. ... inclusion of non scientists biased the report one way or another. ... I see money and politics. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: AMDs well may be running dry
    ... one that the IPCC consists of scientists and non scientists ... that there was a majority of pro GW appointees to the IPCC. ... inclusion of non scientists biased the report one way or another. ... I see money and politics. ...
    (comp.os.vms)
  • Re: Antartic Ice Sheet growing rapidly and Alaskan glacier expansion first time in 200 years .... EN
    ... had to do was reading a post by a usenet genius. ... of the scientists believe opposite of what you believe, ... cold glass of kool aid before reading the article. ... more interested in science than politics. ...
    (alt.politics)
  • Re: OT-"Global Warming" Hoaxers Exposed!
    ... The most important document in the history of the anthropogenic global warming movement was the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's Second Assessment Report, which was published under the auspices of the United Nations in 1996. ... IPCC assessment reports, and particularly their Summaries for Policymakers, are noted for their selective use of information and their bias to support the political goal of control of fossil fuels in order to fight an alleged anthropogenic global warming. ... This ambiguous phrase suggests a group of climate scientists, examining both human and natural influences on climate change, looking at published scientific research, and carefully weighing their decision. ...
    (rec.outdoors.rv-travel)