Home > Critical Thinking, Science & Technology > A Globaloney Warm Stroll Around the Internet

A Globaloney Warm Stroll Around the Internet

Courtesy of the GreenWatchAmerica newsletter from June 18th.  There was so much good stuff.  Enjoy!

¤ Lawrence Solomon, author of The Deniers, brings our attention to a legal examination of the science behind Global Warming.  The bottom line:

…[O]n virtually every major issue in climate change science, the [reports of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] and other summarizing work by leading climate establishment scientists have adopted various rhetorical strategies that seem to systematically conceal or minimize what appear to be fundamental scientific uncertainties or even disagreements.”

Read the whole report by clicking this link and downloading the PDF.

¤ Students at Oxford University appear to have discovered the holes in the Global Warming argument.

On May 20, Oxford Union, the prestigious 187-year-old English debating society, formally considered the question of whether it was more important to focus on growing the economy or solving global warming. Climate realism won the day, 135 to 110. It’s no wonder, considering how the purportedly scientific arguments advanced in support of the scaremongering conclusions have fallen apart since the Climategate scandal invited verification of the left’s previously unexamined claims.

During the debate, Lord Whitty, former environment minister under the Labor government, claimed 95 percent of scientists were in agreement that man was responsible for a coming climatic cataclysm. Lord Monckton, representing climate realists, asked him to provide a reference backing up the claim. The audience jeered Lord Whitty for having none beyond, “Everyone knows it’s true.”

¤ Senator Lindsey Graham, once a staunch advocate of global warming, also appears to have changed his mind:

Reporters asked Graham several times about why he was supporting Lugar’s bill, when just a few months ago he had argued that the Senate shouldn’t pass a “half-a$$ed” bill that lacked hard restrictions on carbon emissions. Graham replied that he now doesn’t think pricing carbon is that important. “The science about global warming has changed,” he noted, offhandedly. “I think they’ve oversold this stuff, quite frankly. I think they’ve been alarmist and the science is in question,” Graham told reporters. “The whole movement has taken a giant step backward.”

¤ Graham’s change of heart seems to parallel (or follow) the feelings of the American public.  According to a poll by the Political Psychology Research Group, discussed in an editorial in the New York Times, the public is at least slightly concerned about warming, and would like the government to take some action, but wants no part of any legislation that could even slightly impede the progress of the American economy.

The explanation for this hesitancy is obvious:  The American People aren’t big fans of polluting, and prefer clean air and water wherever possible.  However, they are not willing to lose their jobs over faulty science and political activism.  One by one, doomsday claim after doomsday claim is falling apart under even the lightest of scrutiny.  Last week, we told you that islands in the South Pacific supposed threatened by rising oceans aren’t sinking at all, but are actually expanding.  This week, we learned:

¤ Finally, we have our Quote of the Week.  It comes from Mike Hulme, in a soon to be published paper telling us what we all already know about the IPCC:

Claims such as ‘2,500 of the world’s leading scientists have reached a consensus that human activities are having a significant influence on the climate’ are disingenuous. That particular consensus judgement, as are many others in the IPCC reports, is reached by only a few dozen experts in the specific field of detection and attribution studies; other IPCC authors are experts in other fields.

Say it with us:  “There is no consensus.”

See also the Michael Crichton quote regarding “consensus” and science, currently located at the bottom of my Quotable Quotes page.

Advertisements
  1. Sgt Relic
    30 Jun 2010 at 5:08 AM

    I doubt that I would feel very confident going up against Christopher Monckton with nothing more that “everyone knows it’s true” as my sole authority. Monckton has a near encyclopedic knowledge of his subject and a wit so sharp you could slice tomatoes with it.

    He has demonstrated to my satisfaction, for what that’s worth, that even if everything the alarmists say is correct, it is still far less expensive in terms of dollars spent and impact on the world economy to adapt to climate change, something we have been doing for thousands of years, than it would be to try and mitigate warming.

    Graham has also taken a scientific approach to arrive at his new position. He has called together experts in a number of disciplines, and after careful examination and testing, determined that he will not get re-elected in SC if he continues with his aisle crossing warmist agenda.

    I find it incredible that Graham and DeMint come from the same state.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Your thoughts?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: