Im demand this man be put in jail!!! Doesn’t he know the science is settled?! NASA too. Put all of NASA in jail. How dare they come up with data that casts doubt on manmade GLOBAL warming.

My guess is that we have trod upon the magical religion of climate change for most of Oliver’s denizens, and it now become quite uncomfortable for them. They realize that the question of whether or not mankind can actually effect change is in fact paramount.

Yes Beatrice, the emperor has no clothes…

Like Iraq’s WMD?

If pedugger doesn’t believe in it, it doesn’t exist?

“Here’s how The Economist characterized the seven-year life-cycle of environmental catastrophes: Year 1 a scientist discovers some potential threat. Year 2 journalists oversimplify and exaggerate it. Year 3 environmentalists chime in and polarize the issue (”Either you agree that the world is about to come to an end and are fired by righteous indignation, or you are a paid lackey of big business”). Year 4 brings the international conferences and bureaucrats well-supplied with club-class tickets and limelight. Year 5 is the year nations pick one country as villain and gang up on it. Year 6 is when skeptical scientists say the scare is exaggerated, driving the Greens into paroxysms of pious rage (”How dare you give space to fringe views? cry these once-fringe people to newspaper editors.”) Year 7 is the year of the quiet climbdown. Without fanfare, the official consensus estimate of the size of the problem shrinks to nothingness. “

Yup, typical lefty windbags, lots of bluster, no data…

And, as for “Pedromalamadingdong,” I have a German last name that has inspired a few barbs, and I don’t go off on the taunter for anti-German bigotry. Of course, it actually works when we’re talking about someone like Michelle Magalang Malkin, whose name includes “Magalang,” rather than a simple “Pedro,” but I digress.

Wow. Just wow. How paranoid are you losers?

I agree there is global warming. I will even concede that some of it is caused by humans.

I want to know HOW much is caused by humans. If it is 1%, then spending billions getting wrapped around the axle is an abject waste of time and money. If it is 50%, then I will also agree that we need to do something about it.

Until we get that answer, especially since we know that there have been warming/cooling cycles in the past, I don’t think we should bring western civilization to a halt for it.

ROFL

Evolution is not a fact

“Evolution” is a fact. It is considered scientific fact that we share common ancestors with other species. How that occurs is the evolutionary theory.

Likewise, global warming is a fact since the average global temperatures have increased over time. The explanation as to how that occurs is the theory.

thus endeth the science lesson

If the medical community reaches a consensus, for example, that the MMR vaccine does NOT cause autism, are you going to dismiss it out of hand, just because there are a few fringe dissenters? Or are you going to trust the professional integrity of your colleagues? Can you at least try to extend the same professional courtesy to your colleagues in geophysics and chemistry, and assume that they are the experts in their field, not you?

Evolution is not a fact, it is a scientific theory.

Attend:
A “fact” is that the acceleration due to gravity near the surface of the Earth is 9.8 m/s^2. A “law” is that the force of gravity between two objects is proportional to their mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them (Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation). Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity posits that gravity is in fact the distortion of space-time by mass. It includes lots’n'lots of math and has many predictions which have subsequently born out. But it is still a theory, not a law, because it is not a simple relationship between two variables.

thus endeth the science lesson

Global Warming, as colloquially understood, is a phenomenon not a theory. The underlying physical principles of global warming are well understood in terms of the laws of thermodynamics. However a “theory” of global warming would have to be a universally applicable set of principles and rules that would model all global warming phenomena on any planet.

Does that mean that the recently issued report is bunk? Of course not. There is plenty of observational evidence (ice core data) and computer modeling (based on scores of underlying physical, chemical, and geological principles) that tell us we are going to be in a world of hurt. Published, peer reviewed articles that reflect the major scientific consensus.

And yes, scientific consensus IS part of the scientific method. There are degreed physicists out there who disagree with the theory of gravity. But the CONSENSUS, based on decades of observation, is that Einstein and Newton basically got it right. IF a suficient amount of evidence becomes available that the present theory is inadequate then the scientific CONSENSUS will CHANGE.

sheesh

sorry about the long post, but this stuff just bugs the hell out of me.

Simply go to…..wait a minute! Do I really want to pestered by militant, jobless lefties where I work?

No, I don’t think so…thanks anyway!