Slashdot Mirror
Debunking a Climate-Change Skeptic
DJRumpy writes "The Danish political scientist Bjørn Lomborg won fame and fans by arguing that many of the alarms sounded by environmental activists and scientists — that species are going extinct at a dangerous rate, that forests are disappearing, that climate change could be catastrophic — are bogus. A big reason Lomborg was taken seriously is that both of his books, The Skeptical Environmentalist (in 2001) and Cool It (in 2007), have extensive references, giving a seemingly authoritative source for every one of his controversial assertions. So in a display of altruistic masochism that we should all be grateful for (just as we're grateful that some people are willing to be dairy farmers), author Howard Friel has checked every single citation in Cool It. The result is The Lomborg Deception, which is being published by Yale University Press next month. It reveals that Lomborg's work is 'a mirage,' writes biologist Thomas Lovejoy in the foreword. '[I]t is a house of cards. Friel has used real scholarship to reveal the flimsy nature' of Lomborg's work."
It only makes sense to take precautions so as to avoid any chance of eliminating your own species. If you're wrong, you spent some money unnecessarily. Just like when you pay for homeowner's insurance, and your house fails to do you the courtesy of burning itself down before you die.
The question is really whether the human race is willing to its potentially infinite future to satiate the greed of a few during their comparatively insignificant lifespans.
Who are you, when compared to humanity?
Orwell: "In a Time of Universal Deceit, telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act"
I don't really believe in global warming, only because I see so many companies using it as a scare tactic to make money. I can't take it seriously. Every commercial break is a barrage of "go green" propaganda. But I'll be the first to admit I've read nothing scientific about climate change. I honestly don't care either way. I'm not interested at all in "saving the earth maaaaan." I'd rather just go about my life. As far as I'm concerned, the world can go up in flames the second I die. Sorry if I sound like a troll, I really don't intend to. Just wondering if there are others out there who feel the same as me.
Could you please be more specific. "A CD", "a FOIA request", "a court battle". What the fuck are you talking about?
If, perchance, you're talking about the CRU emails/files leak then you know very well that the source code shows exactly nothing.
(P.S. What court battle?)
Watch this Heartland Institute video
Were the yeast scientists studying alcohol caught producing fraudulent data, suppressing the work of other yeast scientists whose results didn't agree with the lurid predictions of alcohol increase and colluding on how to cover up their fraud?
This ship has sailed. The CRU, and now the IPCC, are revealed as scientific frauds unworthy of the credence extended to them. As that credence has crumbled so have the claims made and supported by those organizations and carefully ignoring those facts isn't going to help the agenda of global warming believers.
You know what the real pisser is? There's some possibility that the warmies are right although determining whether human activity actually has an effect on the global climate will now have to wait until the debris from the collapse of the CRU and the IPCC is cleared away by real science.
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
This new trend of political affiliations and sexual practices being merrily intertwined in public discourse is interesting. Now, the Teabaggers (TM) have blazed the trail, so public acceptance (at least amongst MSNBC Countdown viewers) should be high.
So, I am trying to come up with something good for you little commies out there:
-Buttfucking Bolshevists?
-Assreaming Al Qaeda fans?
-Creampie Commies?
-Radical Rimjobs?
Tell me if you see something that you like.
"Where do you find evidence that they "fudged their data"?"
Fudged is the nice thing to say "deleted" or "lost" seems to be the most widely applicable phenomenon. I.e: (AR4 is the IPCC report)
"From: Phil Jones
To: “Michael E. Mann”
Subject: IPCC & FOI
Date: Thu May 29 11:04:11 2008
Mike,
Can you delete any emails you may have had with Keith re AR4?
Keith will do likewise. He’s not in at the moment – minor family crisis.
Can you also email Gene and get him to do the same? I don’t
have his new email address.
We will be getting Caspar to do likewise.
I see that CA claim they discovered the 1945 problem in the Nature paper!!
Cheers
Phil
"
The hottest shit right now I guess is their making up of non-existent non-moved Chinese weather stations to "disprove" UHI.
Otherwise, "Hide the decline" offers an interesting case study. Consensus Cultists love to say the quote is "taken out of context", etc. - but this merely confirms that they are indeed... cultists. The more context you get, the more you see that the point was indeed to... fudge the presentation of the proxy record (to prevent any embarrassing... declines).