With great fanfare, in March, Al Gore took Capitol Hill like a conquering hero as he testified on Global Warming before both houses of Congress. Fresh from conquests at the Academy Awards where his adoring Hollywood elites showered him with coveted golden statues for spreading their favorite propaganda, Gore was determined to turn his personal conquest into draconian federal law and ultimate human misery.
Gore's words to Congress were predictable. The earth is warming. The polar ice caps are melting. Polar bears are on the run. And it's man's fault. Solution? Ban or control human activities. The mantra of the religion of Global Warming is getting a little boring. It's quite possible, however, that Gore's appearance on the Hill actually represents the beginning of the end of his influence on climate policy rather than the start of a legislative tsunami.
Why? Because even after the Global Warming storm troopers, armed with billions of dollars, the backing of the Hollywood elite, the news media and most of academia have done everything possible to threaten, bully and force their one-sided propaganda on us, the so-called global warming skeptics seem to be coming out of their hiding places in ever greater numbers. The debate is now taking a dramatic change. As the skeptic side is heard, more Americans are beginning to understand that there are legitimate reasons for skepticism. Here are just a few of the latest developments.
Item: Just days before Gore's charge up Capitol Hill, a high profile climate debate between prominent scientists ended with global warming skeptics being voted the clear winner. Before the start of the debate, held in New York City , the audience polled 57.3% to 29.9% in favor of believing that Global Warming was a crisis. But following the debate the numbers completely flipped to 46.2% to 42.2% in favor of the skeptical point of view. Conclusion - when people hear both sides they can easily judge for themselves what is truth.
Item: On March 13, The New York Times, one of the most adamant promoters of the Global Warming gospel, published a landmark article stating "scientists argue that some of (former Vice President Al) Gore's central points are exaggerated and erroneous."
Item: French scientist Claude Allegre, a prominent French Socialist and supporter of Global Warming dogma, recanted his belief in man-made catastrophic global warming and now says promotion of the idea is motivated by money.
Item: One of Israel 's top young scientists, Nir Shaviv, recently reversed his opinion, declaring that the link between emissions and climate variability has nothing more that "circumstantial evidence."
Item: The United Kingdom 's famed environmental activist David Bellamy also recently converted to skepticism, as did Meteorologist Reid Bryson, who has switched from the 1970's global cooling scare to a global warming skeptic.
Item: A report by the Heartland Institute, entitled "What Climate Scientists Really Say About Global Warming," exposes the weakness of the "consensus" claims of Global Warming shock troops. To reach its findings the report examined two surveys conducted among climate scientists; the first in 1996, and the second in 2003. Both surveys confirm scientists are divided on the issue. Says the report -
More climate scientist "strongly disagree" than "strongly agree" with the notion that climate change is caused by humans.
Most climate scientists do not believe "the current state of knowledge is able to provide reasonable predictions of climate variability" over 100-year periods. Only 2 percent of climate scientists surveyed "strongly agree" that modeling programs designed to predict climate changes are accurate, and Almost all climate scientists agree that climate change could have "positive effects for some societies."
Item: After Global Warming propagandists rushed to declare that the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report proved conclusively that Global Warming was caused by human action, (a report by the way that won't be released until May) the just released summary predicts less global warming than was forecast by previous IPCC reports.
Item: New research by international scientists is revealing that the sun has been a major driver of climate variability. Solar specialist Henrik Svensmark of the Danish National Space Center explained "We have the highest solar activity we have had in at least 1,000 years."
As Senator James Inhofe (R-OK) sums it up, "The usual suspects will still insist that there is a 'consensus' of scientists who agree with Gore. And yes, many governing boards and spokesmen of science institutions must toe the politically correct line of Gore-inspired science, but rank and file scientists are now openly rebelling.
As real debate finally forces fact over headline-making one liners, the truth will become ever more inconvenient to Al Gore and his Global Warming zealots.
Tom DeWeese is president of the American Policy Center and Editor of The DeWeese Report , 70 Main Street, Suite 23, Warrenton Virginia. (540) 342-8911 E-Mail: apcmail@americanpolicy.org
Good thing Gore lost as President. He's just a lyin' ho spouting gloom and doom and raking in the cash. Gee, the sun might have more to do with global warming than us humans...what a stretch
I think we still have to watch what we are doing, but to take these measures that will cost billions and cost jobs makes no sense when we cant stop it anyway.
Warming and cooling is a natural event that has happened for eternity and will continue on despite us peons who think we are alot more powerful than we are.
Whether or not Global Warming is fact or fiction seems now to be rather secondary to the idea that Mr. Gore and others have provided themselves with gainful employment through it.
Some here will remember Global Cooling, and the fear of a new Ice Age, Nuclear Winter, and a lot of doom and gloom scenarios that cause some of us to want to examine the evidence ourselves rather than take someone else's word for it.
What is amazing is how politically incorrect it quickly became to want to decide for one's self.
>> The American Policy Center is a far-right wing think tank run by PR man Tom DeWeese.
The American Policy Center (APC), located in suburban Washington, D.C., is a privately funded, nonprofit, 501 c (4), tax-exempt grassroots action and education foundation dedicated to the promotion of free enterprise and limited government regulations over commerce and individuals. <<
From EXXONSECRETS.ORG, "Documenting Exxon-Mobil's funding of climate change skeptics":
>> A far right organization, APC particularly focuses on the issues of "environmental policy and its effect on private property rights; national federal computer data banks and their effect on individual privacy rights; the United Nations and its effect on American national sovereignty; and federal education policy and its effect on local schools and parental rights." (http://www.americanpolicy.org/about/main.htm) APC is concerned with global warming, both as a treaty viewed as threatening national sovereignty and as laws with economic impacts. Among other anti-climate science writings, APC has published an article by Fred Singer arguing that the earth is cooling, not warming and an article accusing Al Gore and his "theory of global warming" of genocide. (http://www.americanpolicy.org/more/climatecatastrophes.htm abd http://www.americanpolicy.org/more/algore.htm) APC publishes two newsletters and a periodic action alert entitled "Sledgehammer." American Policy Center was a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition <<
>> • The American Policy Center (APC), headed by longtime PR pro Thomas DeWeese, weighs in on what can safely be called the loony fringe of the sound science movement. One issue of the APC's newsletter attacks longtime environmentalist and author Jeremy Rifkin as "anti-industry, anti-civilization, anti-people" and accuses him of preaching "suicide, abortion, cannibalism and sodomy." The APC is also the publisher of a report titled "Safeguarding the Future: Credible Science, Credible Decisions," which says EPA regulatory initiatives rest on "shaky scientific ground." It also publishes a newsletter called EPA Watch, edited by Bonner Cohen, which accuses the EPA of everything from destroying the U.S. economy to trying to stop people from taking showers. A Philip Morris strategy document describes EPA Watch as an "asset" created by PM funding allocated "to establish groups ... that have a broader impact for PM." Another strategy memo discusses plans to promote "EPA Watch/Bonner Cohen as expert on EPA matters, i.e., regular syndicated radio features on EPA activities ... news bureau function, speaking engagements, whatever can be done to increase his visibility and credibility on matters dealing with the EPA." <<
>> The American Policy Center is a far-right wing think tank run by PR man Tom DeWeese.
The American Policy Center (APC), located in suburban Washington, D.C., is a privately funded, nonprofit, 501 c (4), tax-exempt grassroots action and education foundation dedicated to the promotion of free enterprise and limited government regulations over commerce and individuals. <<
From EXXONSECRETS.ORG, "Documenting Exxon-Mobil's funding of climate change skeptics":
>> A far right organization, APC particularly focuses on the issues of "environmental policy and its effect on private property rights; national federal computer data banks and their effect on individual privacy rights; the United Nations and its effect on American national sovereignty; and federal education policy and its effect on local schools and parental rights." (http://www.americanpolicy.org/about/main.htm) APC is concerned with global warming, both as a treaty viewed as threatening national sovereignty and as laws with economic impacts. Among other anti-climate science writings, APC has published an article by Fred Singer arguing that the earth is cooling, not warming and an article accusing Al Gore and his "theory of global warming" of genocide. (http://www.americanpolicy.org/more/climatecatastrophes.htm abd http://www.americanpolicy.org/more/algore.htm) APC publishes two newsletters and a periodic action alert entitled "Sledgehammer." American Policy Center was a member of the Cooler Heads Coalition <<
>> • The American Policy Center (APC), headed by longtime PR pro Thomas DeWeese, weighs in on what can safely be called the loony fringe of the sound science movement. One issue of the APC's newsletter attacks longtime environmentalist and author Jeremy Rifkin as "anti-industry, anti-civilization, anti-people" and accuses him of preaching "suicide, abortion, cannibalism and sodomy." The APC is also the publisher of a report titled "Safeguarding the Future: Credible Science, Credible Decisions," which says EPA regulatory initiatives rest on "shaky scientific ground." It also publishes a newsletter called EPA Watch, edited by Bonner Cohen, which accuses the EPA of everything from destroying the U.S. economy to trying to stop people from taking showers. A Philip Morris strategy document describes EPA Watch as an "asset" created by PM funding allocated "to establish groups ... that have a broader impact for PM." Another strategy memo discusses plans to promote "EPA Watch/Bonner Cohen as expert on EPA matters, i.e., regular syndicated radio features on EPA activities ... news bureau function, speaking engagements, whatever can be done to increase his visibility and credibility on matters dealing with the EPA." <<
Personally, as a non-scientist, I find the argument that most if not ALL current global warming is NATURALLY occuring and NOT man made, makes alot more sense than the Gore/Suzuki spin. Makes them some big bucks, though.
That is not to say I do not support conservation and lessening of the human footprint. I just do not support the misleading lies and hysteria that fools like Gore and Suzuki are spouting. The science does NOT support their claims. They, personally, do not walk the walk, they only talk the talk. No credibility in my book.
If that makes me a raving heretic, so be it. I'm comfortable with that label...I've been called much worse
>> The Friends of Science Society (FoS) is a Canadian non-profit group based in Calgary, Alberta, that is "made up of active and retired engineers, earth scientists and other professionals, as well as many concerned Canadians, who believe the science behind the Kyoto Protocol is questionable." [1]
In an August 12, 2006, article The Globe and Mail revealed that the group had received significant funding via anonymous, indirect donations from the oil industry. <<
>> The G&M says that FOS has taken undisclosed sums from Alberta oil and gas interests. The money was funneled through the Calgary Foundation, to the University of Calgary and on to the FOS though something called the “Science Education Fund.”
All this appears to be orchestrated by Stephen Harper’s long-time political confidante and fishing buddy, U. Calgary Prof Dr. Barry Cooper. It seems the FOS has taken a page right out of the US climate change attack group’s playbook: funnel money through foundations and third party groups to “wipe the oil” off the dollars they receive.
This comes as no surprise considering the FOS has been linked to some of the most notorious oil money-backed scientists in the US <<
That is not to say I do not support conservation and lessening of the human footprint. I just do not support the misleading lies and hysteria that fools like Gore and Suzuki are spouting. The science does NOT support their claims.
Much of the science does. Look, I don't worship at the altars of Gore and Suzuki but I *do* think they're pointed in the right direction. Whenever I read an article such as the one that started this thread, I want to know where these people are coming from. A lot of "credibility" is lacking on *both sides* of the argument. From everything I've read on the subject, my gut tells me that there's probably some middle ground that would benefit our grandchildren and those who come after them. Simple.
Personally, as a non-scientist, I find the argument that most if not ALL current global warming is NATURALLY occuring and NOT man made, makes alot more sense than the Gore/Suzuki spin. Makes them some big bucks, though.
That is not to say I do not support conservation and lessening of the human footprint. I just do not support the misleading lies and hysteria that fools like Gore and Suzuki are spouting. The science does NOT support their claims. They, personally, do not walk the walk, they only talk the talk. No credibility in my book.
If that makes me a raving heretic, so be it. I'm comfortable with that label...I've been called much worse
We should be able to have the debate without resorting to name calling or labels. The science will speak for itself, given time.
I agree with paddyboy that we should attempt to keep our effects on the planet as small as possible, but I do think the Chicken Little side has chosen some representatives that are not as credible as they could be. Add to that the fact that for the longest time, the "Bury our Heads in the Sand" side didn't even seem to have any talking heads until recently, and it's another nice mess you've gotten us into, Ollie.
Why does this right-wing fringe politics stuff get posted on here? We could dump all sorts of left stuff too, but what's the point of either. And it always seem to be the same re-gurgitated material from the same right-wing PR machine. How about some independant thought?
>> The Friends of Science Society (FoS) is a Canadian non-profit group based in Calgary, Alberta, that is "made up of active and retired engineers, earth scientists and other professionals, as well as many concerned Canadians, who believe the science behind the Kyoto Protocol is questionable." [1]
In an August 12, 2006, article The Globe and Mail revealed that the group had received significant funding via anonymous, indirect donations from the oil industry. <<
>> The G&M says that FOS has taken undisclosed sums from Alberta oil and gas interests. The money was funneled through the Calgary Foundation, to the University of Calgary and on to the FOS though something called the “Science Education Fund.”
All this appears to be orchestrated by Stephen Harper’s long-time political confidante and fishing buddy, U. Calgary Prof Dr. Barry Cooper. It seems the FOS has taken a page right out of the US climate change attack group’s playbook: funnel money through foundations and third party groups to “wipe the oil” off the dollars they receive.
This comes as no surprise considering the FOS has been linked to some of the most notorious oil money-backed scientists in the US <<
Much of the science does. Look, I don't worship at the altars of Gore and Suzuki but I *do* think they're pointed in the right direction. Whenever I read an article such as the one that started this thread, I want to know where these people are coming from. A lot of "credibility" is lacking on *both sides* of the argument. From everything I've read on the subject, my gut tells me that there's probably some middle ground that would benefit our grandchildren and those who come after them. Simple.
Again, for me, the attempt to discredit a viewpoint by referring to the funding source is an attempt to discredit the source and ignores the science. I don't care who funds these guys if the science is sound. Gore/Suzuki is spin science from what I can see, designed to make them rich and famous. It's working, too. Are you willing to bet your grandkids futures on the likes of Al Gore and David Suzuki? Now THAT'S scary. Ask yourself why they are doing what they do. Then ask yourself why these OTHER, lesser known scientists do what they have been doing for a lifetime. Who's getting rich?
As far as the funding red herring goes, how much of the grants that the gloom and doom "scientist" get is directly related to the theory that global warming is man made? If these guys say that yes indeed global warming IS a natural phenomenon, their funding dries up. It's in their best interest to continue the charade of gloom and doom. It pays the rent.
The suspicious funding "argument" works both ways and is irrelevant.
God is pissed off! Now, who's gonna stand in that guy's way when the blood is up?
It's true! It's in all the papers! It's on the Radio. It's on TV!
And that, dear hearts, is an actual, other position held by waaaaay too many people.
I've read about that...scary sh!t. I sure as hell hope the making of Jack Daniels doesn't break some emissions laws or Kyoto 'cause that'll be fightin' time!!!!
Home
Calendar
Search
Register
Login
Logged
Male
