Leading Global Warming Skeptic changes mind after watching Al Gore Speak

[multi]

How the evidence for anthropogenic global warming has converged to cause this environmental skeptic to make a cognitive flip
By Michael Shermer

In 2001 Cambridge University Press published Bjørn Lomborg's book The Skeptical Environmentalist, which I thought was a perfect debate topic for the Skeptics Society public lecture series at the California Institute of Technology. The problem was that all the top environmental organizations refused to participate. "There is no debate," one spokesperson told me. "We don't want to dignify that book," another said. One leading environmentalist warned me that my reputation would be irreparably harmed if I went through with it. So of course I did.

My experience is symptomatic of deep problems that have long plagued the environmental movement. Activists who vandalize Hummer dealerships and destroy logging equipment are criminal ecoterrorists. Environmental groups who cry doom and gloom to keep donations flowing only hurt their credibility. As an undergraduate in the 1970s, I learned (and believed) that by the 1990s overpopulation would lead to worldwide starvation and the exhaustion of key minerals, metals and oil, predictions that failed utterly. Politics polluted the science and made me an environmental skeptic.
More..

[floydian slip]

Gorbachev, Maurice strong and Al Gore are referred to as "The Three Musketeers" of the environmental movement. It appears that the environmental situation is being used along with instilling the fear of biological warfare in order to further the one world agenda. Gorbachev states " The environmental crisis is the cornerstone for the New World Order" Maurice strong ( U.N. environmental leader ) was quoted as saying, " Isn't the only hope for the planet that the industrialized civilizations collapse? Isn't it our responsibility to bring that about?" James Garrison ( President of the Gorbachev Foundation ) says " we are going to end up with world government. It's inevitable... There's going to be conflict, coercion and consensus. That's all part of what will be required as we give birth to the first global civilization."

http://www.congregator.net/medicalne...tjen/gobie.htm

this article was written 5 years ago

[Nicobie]

How true.


The proof really is in the puddin' on this..


It's all about jobs for the over achieving academics without a sellable skill.

[floydian slip]

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/...ming020507.htm

Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.

[napho]

The theory of Global Warming has become a vested interest. Lots of people owe their jobs to the theory and will do what it takes to continue feeding at the trough of fear. Not unusual of course.

[Mazer]

If and when a global cooling trend begins in the latter part of this century and the environmentalists all start taking credit for it, there'll be no living with them. There's nothing more annoying than a fool who thinks he's a hero.

[Mazer]

A week after Newsweek printed a cover story about climate change deniers and their alleged financial links to big oil, they printed an other story explaining how they were way out of line in doing so. I admire the editors for having the sand to print a dissenting point of view in their own magazine (albeit without the original title, "Newsweek's Global Warming Crusade"), but Newsweek is a microcosm of the way global warming is portrayed throughout the mainstream media: oftentimes honest reporting is less important than cashing in on public fears.

Greenhouse Simplicities

Robert Samuelson
August 15, 2007

We in the news business often enlist in moral crusades. Global warming is among the latest. Unfortunately, self-righteous indignation can undermine good journalism. A recent Newsweek cover story on global warming is a sobering reminder. It's an object lesson of how viewing the world as "good guys vs. bad guys" can lead to a vast oversimplification of a messy story. Global warming has clearly occurred; the hard question is what to do about it.

If you missed Newsweek's story, here's the gist. A "well-coordinated, well-funded campaign by contrarian scientists, free-market think tanks and industry has created a paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change." This "denial machine" has obstructed action against global warming and is still "running at full throttle." The story's thrust: Discredit the "denial machine," and the country can start the serious business of fighting global warming. The story was a wonderful read, marred only by its being fundamentally misleading.

Full article

The one thing undermining the supposed conspiracy by oil companies to spread FUD about global warming is that the mainstream media is far louder, shriller and more influential than any think tank or industry lobbyist ever could be. That a news magazine would go after them with such zeal clearly indicates how much the global warming alarmists want to put an end to the debate. This makes the article's closing all the more pointed: "As we debate it, journalists should resist the temptation to portray global warming as a morality tale—as NEWSWEEK did—in which anyone who questions its gravity or proposed solutions may be ridiculed as a fool, a crank or an industry stooge. Dissent is, or should be, the lifeblood of a free society." Amen.

[multi]

I am surprised no mention about how NASA had been publishing incorrect climate data for years.. y2k bug lol
or something like that

turns out the 1990's were not the warmest years of last century ,it was sometime in the 1930's

[miss_silver]

Climate changes, wether it is manmade or not doesn't matter...

What matters is that we do something about it NOW instead of debating if it is natural phenomenon or not for Mother Earth will recover over several thousands of years while HUMANITY might not.

I am not afraid for our planet, she can take care of herself and she takes care of us no less (right now but for how long?) While we might not survive what comes next.

So what ever poo is being flung from both camps, Mother Earth Doesn't care at all, She supports and will not care if our own undoing ultimately dooms us.

As long as there is a buck to me made off her bountyful ressources, Fuck her and fuck off those who will live on this planet after we have passed away, right?


The ME, MYSELF and I culture is truly growing rapidly these days eh?

[Mazer]

Originally Posted by miss_silver

I am not afraid for our planet, she can take care of herself and she takes care of us no less (right now but for how long?) While we might not survive what comes next.

I'm confident that we could survive almost anything, and the longer we exist the better our chances get. Before long we'll venture to other planets and then our fate will no longer be tied to this one alone. We won't go extinct before then.

Originally Posted by multi

turns out the 1990's were not the warmest years of last century ,it was sometime in the 1930's

It seems that might be true in Greenland, according to recent studies. However, while certain local temperatures might be lower, the global average temperature is up since the '30s.

[miss_silver]

Originally Posted by Mazer

I'm confident that we could survive almost anything, and the longer we exist the better our chances get. Before long we'll venture to other planets and then our fate will no longer be tied to this one alone. We won't go extinct before then.

Mazer?, are you only a child of GOD still playing in the garden of eden?

We are but a sneeze according to mother earth time. Some say we have been here 500 000 years, some other say 1 000 000 years... We still do not weigh in her balance for we are young ones, prone to tantrums, see current ADMIN.

Even if I do not procreate in the near future, I do hope some future generations will be able to thrive without gaz masks.

So far, the only living population that has survived it all are ants, roaches and moskitoes (see amber rocks)

Mazer, never in history of man that the planet has been that much polluted, so once again, either camp who is fligning poop at eachother will not solve this problem. Only global concience will IMHO.

Will you be part of it Hon?