Skip to content

May 21, 2007

1

Summary of Objections to Global Warming Panic

Here’s my review of why stubborn global-warming critics still exist despite the "overwhelming scientific consensus."

If global warming critics were saying that "the impact won’t be for years, and who cares," that would be short sighted.  What we are instead saying, however, is that

  • the proposed mechanism of global warming is dubious because it is based on questionable science, and more recent science casts doubt on the original alarmist conclusions
  • the proposed efforts to reduce global warming are dubious because we are unsure that humans really are the cause of the warming
  • the proposed future affects of global warming are dubious because there is little evidence, only computer models which are easily manipulated by climate alarmists who want to prove a point
  • the proponents of global warming show all the signs of unreasoned fanaticism – alarmism, suppression of dissent, over-stating their case, patronizing responses to skeptics, and being in bed with the political left on other issues.
  • these dubious claims and efforts take resources away from REAL present AND future crises we ought to address, like poverty, hunger, disease, and the spread of liberalism

Read more from Blog
1 Comment Post a comment
  1. Cineaste
    May 21 2007

    Borrowing Cedric's Link…
    Global warming and the wrath of God
    and more seriously…
    Beware the fossil fools

    "Picture a situation in which most of the media, despite the overwhelming weight of medical opinion, refused to accept that there was a connection between smoking and lung cancer. Imagine that every time new evidence emerged, they asked someone with no medical qualifications to write a piece dismissing the evidence and claiming that there was no consensus on the issue.
    Imagine that the BBC, in the interests of "debate", wheeled out one of the tiny number of scientists who says that smoking and cancer aren't linked, or that giving up isn't worth the trouble, every time the issue of cancer was raised.
    Imagine that, as a result, next to nothing was done about the problem, to the delight of the tobacco industry and the detriment of millions of smokers. We would surely describe the newspapers and the BBC as grossly irresponsible.
    Now stop imagining it, and take a look at what's happening. The issue is not smoking, but climate change. The scientific consensus is just as robust, the misreporting just as widespread, the consequences even graver."

Share your thoughts, post a comment.

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Switch to our mobile site

Page optimized by WP Minify WordPress Plugin

Compression Plugin made by Web Hosting