Religions > Atheism > #Truths Inconvenient for AlGore: Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Kurt Nicklas" |
| Date: |
30 Jun 2007 07:49:42 PM |
| Object: |
#Truths Inconvenient for AlGore: Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny |
Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
June 30, 2007
BY JAMES M. TAYLOR
In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop
tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on
an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the
purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the
truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical
political posturing as the central focus of public discourse.
If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a
difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming.
A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open
and honest regarding the science. Global warming threats ought to be
studied and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated
as a means of building support for a desired political position.
Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient
Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made
them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by
publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.
For example, Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and
global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the
American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported,
"Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global
warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and
that global warming was to blame."
Gore claims the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and
that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23,
2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the
ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of
the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the
forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer
replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong
equatorial sunshine."
....
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article
.
|
|
| User: "putpeopleoverprofit" |
|
| Title: Re: #Truths Inconvenient for AlGore: Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny |
30 Jun 2007 09:09:57 PM |
|
|
Kurt Nicklas <nicklask@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:1183250982.647709.200130@o61g2000hsh.googlegroups.com:
Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
June 30, 2007
BY JAMES M. TAYLOR
In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop
tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on
an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the
purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the
truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical
political posturing as the central focus of public discourse.
If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a
difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming.
A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open
and honest regarding the science.
Agreed. Let's see if you follow your own advice...
Global warming threats ought to be
studied
For how long? Until the "science" is "all in". Or just until its too
late to do anything about it (if it's not already). Because the science
will never be "all in"... that's the nature of science.
and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated
as a means of building support for a desired political position.
What political position are you talking about? Climate is not a
political thing, it is what is, and behaves according a complex set
inputs based on the laws of physics...
Many of the assertions
It should be noted that you start out here with "assertion" but quickly
jump to "claim" below. Assertions are a debating tool, not a statement
of fact.
Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient
Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made
them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by
publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.
For example, Gore claims
There it is. There were no claims made along these lines... only
assertions, innuendo, thought experiments... whatever. No one claims
cause and effect, only correlation and suspicion of interaction.
that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and
global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the
American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported,
"Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global
warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and
that global warming was to blame."
This is your scientific refutation of Al Gore's "claims"????
It appears to me they simply don't yet understand the cause and effect.
Gore claims
There it is again.
the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and
that global warming is to blame.
He did no such thing. You may have inferred such a thing, but only you
can answer that.
Yet according to the November 23,
2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the
ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of
the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the
forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer
replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong
equatorial sunshine."
"researchers think" is your other scientific refutation of Al Gore's
"claims"... you are striking out here. This is called a theory. As
theory's go it's not bad, but it does not negate the other theory...
that human activity is raising the global temperature thru the
introduction of greenhouse gas which has been sequestered for millions
of years.
Seems you cannot follow your own advice after all.
So what's your solution? Ignore the evidence and hope for the best?
Excuse me if don't think that is the most prudent course. Considering we
only have the one planet, the prudent course would be to take action to
curb our influence to the extent we understand what that might be.
If the Climatologists are wrong, we have weaned ourselves off of fossil
fuels for no good reason, cleaned up our air and suffered the innovation
associated with widening of our energy options. Sounds aweful.
If, however, they are right... we lose everything. You explain that to
next generation.
--
Marketplace of Ideas...
www.putpeopleoverprofit.org
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Hartung" |
|
| Title: Re: #Truths Inconvenient for AlGore: Alarmist global warming claimsmelt under scientific scrutiny |
30 Jun 2007 08:25:48 PM |
|
|
Kurt Nicklas wrote:
Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny
June 30, 2007
BY JAMES M. TAYLOR
In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop
tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on
an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the
purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the
truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical
political posturing as the central focus of public discourse.
If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a
difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming.
A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open
and honest regarding the science. Global warming threats ought to be
studied and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated
as a means of building support for a desired political position.
Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient
Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made
them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by
publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.
For example, Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and
global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the
American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported,
"Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global
warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and
that global warming was to blame."
Gore claims the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and
that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23,
2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the
ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of
the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the
forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer
replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong
equatorial sunshine."
...
http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article
The "global warming" crowd will either ignore this, or find some reason to
belittle it. Especially those in Usenet.
.
|
|
|
| User: "putpeopleoverprofit" |
|
| Title: Re: #Truths Inconvenient for AlGore: Alarmist global warming claims melt under scientific scrutiny |
30 Jun 2007 09:12:15 PM |
|
|
David Hartung <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in
news:bJ6dnUMPfe0GnxrbnZ2dnUVZ_tadnZ2d@comcast.com:
The "global warming" crowd will either ignore this, or find some
reason to belittle it. Especially those in Usenet.
That's because it's wrong and deserves to be held up for what it is.
--
Marketplace of Ideas...
www.putpeopleoverprofit.org
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
