you might have heard about al gore‘s movie, an inconvenient truth. it has (predictably) recieved a warm welcome (no pun intended) from the media and environmental wackos alike, typically with reviewers calling for immediate action or revolution. well, there’s just one problem: global warming is still a sham.
not since bowling for columbine have we had to deal with such an ignorance of the facts and distortion of the truth. what’s funny is that the AP ran a story about how scientists confirmed all the facts in the movie. here’s a sample:
“Excellent,” said William Schlesinger, dean of the Nicholas School of Environment and Earth Sciences at Duke University. “He got all the important material and got it right.”
“I sat there and I‘m amazed at how thorough and accurate,” Corell said. “After the presentation I said,
Al, I‘m absolutely blown away. There‘s a lot of details you could get wrong.‘ … I could find no error.”
We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.
i guess the 19 scientists that the AP talked to on the phone carry more weight than the 17,100 scientists (that is, 17,100 that have been verified as physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, chemists, biochemists, etc… not your average joe moron like mr. gore) that have signed the petition against the global warming agreement.
then, we get a majority press release from the senate, which contains interesting bits of information, like this one:
Richard S. Lindzen, the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Atmospheric Science at MIT, wrote:
“A general characteristic of Mr. Gore’s approach is to assiduously ignore the fact that the earth and its climate are dynamic; they are always changing even without any external forcing. To treat all change as something to fear is bad enough; to do so in order to exploit that fear is much worse.” – Lindzen wrote in an op-ed in the June 26, 2006 Wall Street Journal
so who am i going to believe? al gore (who i should probably thank for inventing the internet so i could post this), backed by the associated press (and their 19 scientists), the entertainment industry and every moonbat environmentalist wacko on the planet, making their decisions based almost entirely upon emotion… or 17,100 scientists who deal with such issues as a daily part of their professional responsibilities and expertise, making their decision based upon factual data and practical experience?