UPDATE:
Japanese scientists refute human cause to global warming. 
UPDATE: George Will on Global Warming.UPDATE: Senate Report debunks the polar bear extinction propaganda.
The global warming debate continues. A reader sent me an
article and the following retort:
I have known Peter for 20 years interesting that Limbaugh and Colter publish his data but won't let him put it in perspective. I saw his study on what the science community thinks. The sample size is very large (I think over 20,000) and he asked every scientist that he can find in the field. Despite the few that Coulter and Limbaugh dig up, 90% think it is happening and 20 think it is man-made. That does not mean the theory is right but it does mean we ought to take it seriously enough to study it more and in the meantime do what we can to stop experimenting with the climate by dumping extraordinary amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere and just waiting to see what happens.
Coulter and Limbaugh have nothing to do with it. At least they are talking about the fact that global warming is possibly happening but what causes it is not determined. There's a majority of scientists that embrace the thesis that humans are causing global warming is the myth. Just because a scientist is asked his opinion doesn't make his thoughts ipso facto. They asked over 20,000 scientists whose field of expertise is climate change who have actually participated in the studies? There are independent academic climatologists who disagree. But climatologists are more dire in their predictions than meteorologists who study weather. Let's see who would stand to lose more funding if they said there was no climate change? Hmmmm, that would be climatologists? Survival of funding is more important than being accurate. I see it every day in university research. It's ALL political. Those who need money raise the most hue and cry.
We do need to study it more without bias and without fear. The need for debate, accurate research, and a common sense approach, rather than the 'Chicken Littlers' wrecking havoc with the United States economy and not the real problem country of China. More political anti-American bs.
Just 35 years ago, the climatologists were bemoaning an Ice Age coming. Let's do a legitimate, unbiased 20-year study on climate change and get China to change their industrial processes before changing life-affecting laws like the failed
multi-billion dollar cost of the Kyoto Treaty and putting America out of business.
The pro-global-warming populist committed the same liberal-forced manipulated mistake when he wrote
'that 90% think it is happening and 20 think it is man-made.' I'm very disappointed. I was hoping for more truthful debate.
The pro-environmentalist article on Doran actually said:
Last year, he assembled a database of 3,146 geoscientists across the planet
to get their views on global warming. The results: 90 percent believe it exists,
with 80 percent sure that earthlings are causing most of it.
One question that springs to mind is why would a scientist participate in a database that they didn't believe in and that others could manipulate your participation as agreeing with the pro-global warming crowd? 90% of 3,146 scientists (2,831) out of over tens of thousands if not, millions of scientists in the world? Thousands of academic scientists, international and American scientists dispute the "consensus" word.
My other question that indicates the bias of this ridiculously leftist article is that: Did the survey questions actually use the word "earthlings" (which dehumanizes us and what liberals would like) or was this the bias of the article writer? I would LOVE to be able to read the research publication. Funny it wasn't included with the article on Doran.
Let's go to the
U.S. Senate Committee hearings. But the United States can hardly be unbiased. They're the ones destroying the Earth. Those damned evil capitalists!
Yeah, right.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
October 15, 2007
I'm sure there were very few people that were shocked by the Nobel Prize announcement committee that Al Gore actually won a Nobel Prize. The shock was that it was under the wrong category.
- Medicine
- Physics
- Chemistry
- Literature
- Economics
- Peace
Hmmmm, let me think. Now which ones of those categories does anti-Americanism, anti-capitalism, and Bush-hating ideology belong?
Of course with left-wing extremists, terrorist enthusiasts, and Democrat socialists, left is right, in is out, and up is down. With that kind of thought process, the Peace Prize aka "Piece Prize" is the only one that comes to my mind that is the opposite of what it actually is.
Take past Nobel Piece Prize winners,
Arafat, Jimmy
Carter, the
Irish "I Want To Kill Bush" Betty Williams, for instance. Arafat wants Hamas to slay the Semites, Carter wants the world to side with terrorists, and Betty Williams wants to rid the world of the evil George W. Bush. What a crazy upside down world we live in.
It's just common sense, albeit rare among environmentalists, but this time they were right. Al Gore had to win in the Nobel Piece Prize category because it doesn't belong under the science category. Gore's solutions to a hysterical environmental propaganda are not based on scientific facts but desires and hidden agendas of eradicating capitalism and democracy from the globe.
How can anyone say that? Why, Al Gore is the epitome of jet-set, tree-hugging presidential election martyrs this world needs more of. I was even accused of being politically biased because if a Republican had won the Piece Prize I would be thrilled. How convoluted is that? The inconvenient truth is that Gore should not have won the Piece Prize because:
- Gore's theories has nothing to do with peace.
- Gore's global warming results are not substantiated.
- Gore's jet-setting to promote global warming have increased CO2 emissions.
- The money wasted on Gore's concerts around the world could have saved hundreds of thousands of lives in 3rd world countries just by feeding them.
UPDATE: Over 32,000 scientists have now signed. How can a theory that 17,000 scientists worldwide disagree with be fact?
May 19, 2008. - Yep, 17,000 scientists around the globe signed their names to a petition warning against global warming hysteria.
How can a Danish scientist, voted one of the top 100 most influential people in the world in 2004 by Time Magazine, the 14th most influential academic in the world by Foreign Policy and Prospect magazine, and 2005 'Young Global Leader' by the World Economic Forum 2005 no longer be considered a viable environmental resource?
Bjorn Lomborg, the former director of Denmark's Environmental Assessment Institute, the Director of the Copenhagen Consensus Center, and Adjunct Professor of the Copenhagen Business School has been crucified since he has come out against the emotionalism and knee-jerk reaction to the global warming theory?
He was taken to court for his anti-global warming hysteria statements and vindicated. Lomberg's editorial in the Boston Globe titled
"An Inconvenient Peace Prize" is a must read.
If you have read Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" and not read
"Cool It - The Skeptical Environmentalists Guide To Global Warming" then you need to balance your propaganda levels by reading the "other side." For instance, take the 'chicken-littled' story of the demise and possible extinction of the polar bears alarmingly noted by the World Wildlife Fund 2002 report and the 2004 Artic Climate Impact Assessment:
"Both relied extensively on research published in 2001 by the Polar Bear Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union. [T's note: Whenever the word "Union" with a capital "U" is used, be leery.] But what this group really told us was that of the the twenty distinct subpopulations of polar bears, one or possibly two were declining in Baffin Bay; more than half were known to be stable; and two subpopulations were actually increasing around the Beaufort Sea. Moreover, it is reported that the global polar-bear population has increased dramatically over the past decades, from about five thousand members in the 1960's to twenty-five thousand today, thorugh stricter hunting regulation. Contrary to what you might expect - and what was not pointed out in any of the recent stories - the two populations in decline come from areas where it has actually been getting colder over the past fifty years, whereas the two increasing populations reside in areas where it is getting warmer."
There will be no drowning polar bears in our future. Al Gore winning the Nobel Peace Prize is nothing more than a political statement, not rocket science. The MSM's, the socialists of the world, and the anti-American countries, and the United States Bush hatriots, wanted to show that they are still in control. The world is going to Hell in an handbasket and Bush is the reason for all of the world's ills.
But that too is a convoluted theory. The world is getting better and no one reported it.
[...] the joyous trends in health and wealth documented in the report indicate a gigantic leap forward for humanity. This is probably the first time you've heard any of this because--while the grim "Global 2000" and "Limits to Growth" reports were deemed worthy of headlines across the country--the media mostly ignored the good news and the upbeat predictions of "State of the Future."
But here they are: World-wide illiteracy rates have fallen by half since 1970 and now stand at an all-time low of 18%. More people live in free countries than ever before. The average human being today will live 50% longer in 2025 than one born in 1955.
To what do we owe this improvement? Capitalism, according to the U.N. Free trade is rightly recognized as the engine of global prosperity in recent years.
In 1981, 40% of the world's population lived on less than $1 a day. Now that percentage is only 25%, adjusted for inflation. And at current rates of growth, "world poverty will be cut in half between 2000 and 2015"--which is arguably one of the greatest triumphs in human history. Trade and technology are closing the global "digital divide," and the report notes hopefully that soon laptop computers will cost $100 and almost every schoolchild will be a mouse click away from the Internet (and, regrettably, those interminable computer games).
Good news is never newsworthy - only political statements and pro-terrorists propaganda. It's the only way evil can win. Everything is bad, come over to the dark side and it will be better.
Gore didn't win the Piece Prize - he actually stole it away from those in the world who are making a difference for Peace: The United States military and their Allies around the world making the world free and safe.
You're not drinking. 
Posts
