You Know How I Know Global Warming is Mostly Baloney?

Because the people arguing against Global Warming "skeptics" feel the need to resort to ad hominem attacks and highly emotionally charged wording to make their case.

Some zingers:

"In his recent opinion piece, National Post's Terrence Corcoran displays how out of touch he is with the recent National Academy of Science's findings on Confused?climate change. It is not worth debating the misinformation he purports, so we will just post a link to his piece and let it speak for itself."

"I am not a scientist, but I do know that in science, much like any other profession, it helps to know the background of the information source." Standard "shill of the energy industry" accusation.

And those are just from the front page. Anyone who disputes Global Warming is called a "spinner." Any information calling Global Warming into doubt is "disinformation" even if it's simply a matter of differing opinions. Honestly, I'd much rather hang with the skeptics than with people like this. I wonder what they'd say about Michael Crichton?

Share this

Constant, Now, the fact that


Now, the fact that you can’t seem to pay attention shows me that something is inhibiting your mind from operating effectively. What is that? Usually, it’s politics, which makes people dumb.

I didn't see your opinion on global warming. My first post was to Sean and not you. Did it ever cross your mind that haven't read every single comment on this thread, or even if I had that I wouldn't likely remember them all a day later? That perhaps I only read this response by you?

A response which I must say kinda seems like you weren't paying attention to me. At least from my perspective. I certainly wasn't suggesting scientists stop investigating the issue as you seemed to think. The context of my post was precisely the political content and it's the political conversation I was referring to.

Let's just chalk this up to some miscommunication. That is unless you disagree with what I am saying after careful consideration. I don't recall telling anybody to shut up and don't see it here on the thread.

BTW, I have Lomborg's book though I haven't read the thing all the way through. Just what interested me. Also that "Dixon" reference was a misfetch from my memory. I think the person I am referring to is Dixie Lee Ray. I read a book by her, "Trashing the Planet" and I vaguely remember her making some pretty dumb arguments.

There's global warming on

There's global warming on mars, people.


That said, I think Brian Macker nailed it. I just want to stress how tendentious the idea is that we have any clue how much our temperature change owes to anthropogenic causes.