8 thoughts on “You Know Who Are The Real “Deniers”?”
uh huh. There’s no need. Even if you take their “dire warnings” as truth, it’s insufficient peril for the response that is being demanded. Separation of climate change science from climate change policy is worth fighting for, regardless of who is right over the science, because it’s absurd to have scientists trying to write policy and politicians trying to do science.
Not to mention the fact that their policy recommendations are certain to increase poverty and human suffering, and destroy freedom.
heh, you’ll regularly hear climate scientists yelling “shut up” to non-experts and then making obnoxious claims about “green economics”. 🙂
Now it’s REALLY green – Algae will save us
Wow Heartland had almost $34 million in revenue over 6 years. How much money is raised by the alarmists?
Again with the 97% canard. And, Borenstein artfully confuses what is fake and what is not. John Hinderaker nails Gliek here.
Here’s an interesting video by Prof. Dr. Vincent Courtillot giving a presentation about climate skepticism. Ran across it from one of the comments at Rand’s article on PJM. I like at the end he gives his opinions about climate change as a scientist first, “And now let me take off my scientist hat and put on my citizens hat and give my opinion of policy”. It’s good that he makes the distinction between the science part of the debate and the policy parts of the debate. Also has a lot of good info about how, shocker of shockers, The Sun has a lot to do with the climate.
So far, my favorite conspiracy theory is that HI deliberately targetted Gleick by preteding to forge their own documents to make them look forged. No, I’m not kidding.
Ernst Stavro Blofeld, secret chairman of HI must have deduced Gleick’s real identity when asked for the document, and Gleick played right into his hands! MUAHAHAHA…
uh huh. There’s no need. Even if you take their “dire warnings” as truth, it’s insufficient peril for the response that is being demanded. Separation of climate change science from climate change policy is worth fighting for, regardless of who is right over the science, because it’s absurd to have scientists trying to write policy and politicians trying to do science.
Not to mention the fact that their policy recommendations are certain to increase poverty and human suffering, and destroy freedom.
heh, you’ll regularly hear climate scientists yelling “shut up” to non-experts and then making obnoxious claims about “green economics”. 🙂
Now it’s REALLY green – Algae will save us
Wow Heartland had almost $34 million in revenue over 6 years. How much money is raised by the alarmists?
Again with the 97% canard. And, Borenstein artfully confuses what is fake and what is not. John Hinderaker nails Gliek here.
Here’s an interesting video by Prof. Dr. Vincent Courtillot giving a presentation about climate skepticism. Ran across it from one of the comments at Rand’s article on PJM. I like at the end he gives his opinions about climate change as a scientist first, “And now let me take off my scientist hat and put on my citizens hat and give my opinion of policy”. It’s good that he makes the distinction between the science part of the debate and the policy parts of the debate. Also has a lot of good info about how, shocker of shockers, The Sun has a lot to do with the climate.
So far, my favorite conspiracy theory is that HI deliberately targetted Gleick by preteding to forge their own documents to make them look forged. No, I’m not kidding.
Ernst Stavro Blofeld, secret chairman of HI must have deduced Gleick’s real identity when asked for the document, and Gleick played right into his hands! MUAHAHAHA…