Why not just follow the guy who started Google around. The logic is the same.
The way I see folks who insist on clinging to their last bastians of failed resource gluttony is this: the debate has ended, the world is going to move forward with or without them so it really doesn't matter a hill o' beans whether the few of them ever "get it" or not. It's kind of like the poor old fool who refused to leave his cabin on Mt. St Helens. Everyone else heeded the warnings, and he went down doing what he wanted to do. Good for him.
Except in this case they don't die, fortunately. They just end up kind of looking like him.
One thing people have come to understand about John Coleman's junk science supporting his wild and unsubstantiated claims - is that he's not a climatologist. He's a TV weatherman. And we all know how much we can trust those peoples' opinions.
And while it's true Coleman did start the all weather TV channel, he only ran it for a year. Since then it's been run by other business people who in huge numbers now embrace the scientific data which proves dramatic climate change.
In other words, Coleman is a lunatic screecher who has long since been replaced, and put out to pasture at a San Diego TV channel.
How about Dr. Roy Spencer? Is he qualified to speak with authority on the myth of global warming? Read this.
Scientific facts are either true or not true. Scientific facts are not determined by who wins the debate or a consensus opinion. That is the bastion of those who believe group-think and feeling worried about something makes it the truth.
Originally posted by The Weatherman: Scientific facts are either true or not true. Scientific facts are not determined by who wins the debate or a consensus opinion. That is the bastion of those who believe group-think and feeling worried about something makes it the truth.
Ahhhhhhhh Dr. Roy Spencer. From the Marshall Institute.
I think I know who you mean. He's the fellow who, in 2007 made this statmente ... quoting here:
quote:
FULL DISCLOSURE (updated October 27, 2007)
It has become commonplace for scientists like me who are skeptical of mankind's role in global warming to be branded as shills for "Big Oil".
(...)
After 12 years of receiving no compensation for my writings, I was eventually asked to write global warming related articles for TechCentralStation.com (now TCSDaily.com). That website advocated science, technology, and free markets, and was indeed partially funded by Exxon Mobil.
Is that the Roy Spencer you are talking about?
Do you think this is the first time these no-names have been brought up in a discussion about Global Warming, which by the very nature of this thread which Hank R has started is political?
You're going to list 4 or 5 more tedious and well repeated names that no one's heard of and then I'm going to point out that it's your list of maybe a dozen scientists connected to conservative think tanks versus virtually every other serious scientist on the planet. It could go on for ever, but it always ends the same.
You will lose this debate every time you try to engage in it because chances are everything you know about the subject has been given to you by an AM talk jockey, or you've cut and pasted it from Free Republic. I can understand wanting to put on the tights and do this futile dance once in a while. But really ... wouldn't you rather just talk about fun stuff? I would. That's why hope this thread gets shut for being the politically enflamed rhetoric that it is.
But really ... wouldn't you rather just talk about fun stuff? I would. That's why hope this thread gets shut for being the politically enflamed rhetoric that it is.
I agree. This topic is headed now the wrong road. Sonny
