Discussing the recent report by Sir Nicholas Stern on the economics of climate change, Lindzen says:
"The central theme of it is that there is a near universal consensus of opinion within the scientific community about the dangers of climate change. But this is not true.
There is no such unanimity among scientists."
Lindzen goes on to concisely debunk the current AGW hysteria, concluding that it is "completely divorced from scientific reality" and that "Like a religion, environmentalism is suffused with hatred for the material world and again, like religion, it requires devotion rather than intellectual rigour from its adherents."
Of course, Lindzen, a Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, is no match for the warmies of Palo Alto, some of whom get their information directly from such irrefutable sources as Newsweek or even the Goracle himself.
And YES there is consensus in the scientific community about global warming. The article you quote presents no evidence to the contrary. Of course, a few odd balls will always be around to claim otherwise... especially if they are paid to do so, as they actually often are.
The US is about the only industrialized country where people are still largely in denial about global warming in such large numbers.
Posted by Wolf, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Mar 11, 2007 at 11:02 am
Walter is obviously correct about the motives of large US corporation. Additionally, they correctly understand that once the political situation is such that the regulations will come independent of scientific or economic reasons, they better be the ones sitting at the table and setting the rules so they can make the additional buck trading their future "carbon rights", rather than others making that buck off them...
I will say it very simply... when the day comes that we can *accurately* predict weather just a week ahead, that day I'll start taking the climate models more seriously.
Posted by Someone, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Mar 11, 2007 at 12:55 pm
"The US is the nation other nations are eagerly anticipate being allowed to tax under the guize of carbon credit trading, a tax on our productivity."
Actually other industrialized nations are moving along on this without the US. Witness Europe that decided this week to cut back its emissions of warming gases by 20% by 2020. And they are committed to doing it, because there is so much overwhelming consensus in the scientific community that global warming is real, regardless of Walter's and Wolf's expertise in the area.
Posted by Geoff, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on Mar 12, 2007 at 6:49 am
Actually, Someone, Europe now has a vague pact about the need to reduce CO2 by 20%. There is plenty of dispute about the details and a fair amount of doubt whether the various countries will agree on a specific plan.
And even if they do come up with a plan, there is great reason to expect they will not adhere to it. All the western European countries signed the Kyoto pact, but only two came close to meeting the targets. And Europe as a whole actually increased its GH gas emissions than the non-signatory US in the period since its signing.
It's simply too difficult, in a democracy at least, to extract the kinds of costs and impose the reduced living standards required to reduce global warming gasses on a voting public -- even a public that believes in the science like Europe's.
And the biggest problem - China - isn't having any part of the whole thing.
And as Walter Wallis points out, experiments with carbon taxes haven't exactly been ringing successes thus far. We're foolish to rush into that.
Posted by Someone, a resident of the Palo Verde neighborhood, on Mar 12, 2007 at 10:45 am
"... experiments with carbon taxes haven't exactly been ringing successes thus far. We're foolish to rush into that."
Geoff, you don't have to worry about "rushing". The US is not rushing to do anything about global warming, disappearing arctic ice etc.... We'll just pass the problem on to our children for the sake of profits.
BTW, carbon taxes is not the only thing included in the European plan agreed upon last week.
I just watched it. It's excellent. Dozens of top experts systematically demolish the theory of man-made global warming. The debunkers include NASA scientists, former lead authors of the IPCC reports, the former president of the National Academy of Science, the co-founder of Greenpeace, and many others.
One particularly important point is that the Warmies seek to impose constraints (eg, no fossil fuels) on developing nations that will condemn hundreds of million of the poorest people on the planet to ongoing poverty and despair. And yet the same Warmies are trying to claim the moral high ground. The hypocrisy is mind-boggling.
Posted by TryingToSnowUsAllAgainEh?, a resident of another community, on Mar 13, 2007 at 11:10 pm
This "documentary" is just the next wave of disinformation put out by the oil industry through their academic flunkies:
After arguing all along it wasn't really occuring, now they've retreated in the face of overwhelming facts and say, well OK it's occuring, but it really isn't our fault, it natural - but even if it is our fault, we can't do anything about it, so we'll all just have to sit back and take it like a man.
What a load of BS!
Just more "political science" floated as "real science."