The bad news for global warming alarmists just keeps rolling in. Below is a very small sampling of very inconvenient developments for Gore, the United Nations, and the mainstream media. Peer-reviewed studies, analyses, and prominent scientists continue to speak out to refute climate fears. The majority of data presented below is from just the past few weeks. Also see: U.S. Senate Minority Report: “Over 400 Prominent Scientists (and rapidly growing) Disputed Man-Made Global Warming Claims in 2007” & ‘Consensus’ On Man-Made Global Warming Collapses in 2008 - July 18, 2008 & An August 2007 report detailed how proponents of man-made global warming fears enjoy a monumental funding advantage over skeptical scientists.
Amusing.
I have always considered the "global warming" craze a fad similar to the "global overpopulation" craze in the 1960s.
9 comments:
Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait... you're linking to the list that famously has gardeners on it? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!
silly liesl
disparaging those who disagree with her religion
try this?
Church of Global Warming
Oh honey, I'm not disparaging gardeners; I'm laughing at the idea that anyone would take that Inhofe list seriously! Here you go:
http://bravenewclimate.com/2008/09/01/spot-the-recycled-denial-iii-%E2%80%93-prof-ian-plimer/
you still don't get it do you.
instead of challenging the idea, you disparage the messenger of the idea, whether it be inhofe or gardeners.
first they call it man made global warming. then when the evidence did not show warming, they changed to be man made climate change.
you just don't see that there are trends in the scientific community. nor do you understand that concensus is not science.
Hello, red herring! I've never said one word about the messenger in this stupid list. I've, instead, been laughing at the notion that you take it seriously.
wow
you really don't have any self awareness of what you are saying do you.
comment 1 you disparage gardeners
comment 3 you disparage Inhofe
comment 5 i guess you are now disparaging me
it has all been about the messengers. and since the message challenges your new found religion, you haven't even been able to confront the message, just the messengers.
you really have drunk deeply of the koolaid of "anthropomorphic climate change" haven't you. good luck with that. sad really. too bad really.
I find it hilarious that you think I am disparaging gardeners rather than the idea that gardeners are climate change experts, as anyone would reasonably assume.
I also find it hilarious that you think I am disparaging Inhofe rather than the list that has his name, as I specifically stated. Nowhere did I disparage the man himself. Again, a red herring AND a strawman.
Oh, I'm not disparaging you, I'm just hoping you're going to suddenly say, haha! just kidding!
Honestly, Huan, I don't who you are at this point. I had no idea that you had such fringe, such racist ideas and I have been appalled at your extremism over the last few months. I used the comment you made (without naming you, of course) about African Americans being able to let go of the "woe is me" attitude in one of my classes last week as an example of racism. My students gasped.
I still think you're smarter than this. Or, perhaps I just want to think that so that I don't lose my good opinion of my own judgment in others. Either way, I hope you step away from the extremism and move back toward evidence and reason based ideology. You are going to believe what you want to believe, of course, but I hope you decide to move back toward the middle.
1. Re: gardeners as experts. You remain obsessed with the ideas of expert opinions and credentials. You embrace several logical fallacies here. Firstly, even laymen can speak the truth. Secondly, even a list that include non-expert can remain truthful and expert in its conclusion. Thirdly you still do not understand that attacking the credential of gardeners is not equivalent to attacking the message they carry.
2. Please link to any of my posts that have been racist or extreme. I have never suggested that African Americans are in anyway inferior to any other culture or ethnic groups. I do believe their current culture is deleterious for themselves. In a previous post I spoke of the strategic choices the African American community made between Booker T Washington & WEB Du Bois. The consequences of that choice I have seen first hand, and have contrasted with the response of other ethnic minorities like East Asians and South Asians, even Latin Americans. I believe they have made the wrong choice and are suffering for it. I also believe they can redress this error as it is not too late. Even some African American leaders acknowledge this as well, Bill Cosby being a popular example. Again, I understand many might disagree with this interpretation and I have no problems with that, but to suggest I have racist ideas because of it is absurd. However it is in line with your continued reliance of disparaging the messenger rather than confronting the merit of the message.
3. I have seen what the culture of victimhood has done first hand. I am not stretching the truth but I am certain I have done more to help alleviate the suffering of African Americans with actual work than to just talk about it. I have also worked to further advance their standing in my profession. Some of us actually do what we can, not just talk on what should or could be. The biggest problem with racism in the US currently is not bigotry but the culture of victimhood when you are a minority. African Americans will shortly be represented in all levels of government, business and education. Actual bigotry, while undoubtedly still exist, is becoming less and less of a problem. Yet, African American culture remains dysfunctional with high divorce rates and single parenthood, crime and incarceration, or employment and education. Some African Americans have come to the same conclusion as I have through direct research and discovery, Thomas Sowell being one.
4. If by “evidence and reason based ideology” you are referring to global warming I know I have a sharper mind to analyze scientific data than most. In fact I do it regularly when reading journals and reports. I understand the difference between a hypothesis driven research and a bias driven agenda. I can also evaluate both methodology and limitations of data for both analysis and conclusions. Hard data for man made global warming is scant. Simply put, we do not have sufficient data to support the existence of man made global warming, especially since we have only recorded data for about 200 years or so, which is scant when the history of the earth have clearly demonstrated ice ages melting long before Man knew how to make fire.
5. I too have been disappointed with your extremism and have stated it previously. You have a sharp brain but have a penchant to think emotionally and personally rather than rationally. You tend to attack people rather than ideas. When you do confront the ideas, you then tend to react emotionally rather than consider potential validity of the matter or the alternative conclusion. A trained rational mind would seek to prove the null hypothesis first rather than disprove the null hypothesis first. Your attacks and word choices regarding Sarah Palin clearly exemplifies this emotive irrationality. I have never even approach that level of hate in my disapproval of Obama (or for that matter, any ideas or groups with whom I have disagreed) with what I have posted on my blog, in personal conversation or private thoughts. For example, read this post where I compare Obama to McCain. The problem with emotional arguments isn’t simply the diminishing objectivity in order to evidence the truth but blindness to one’s own bias. I hope you can gain some personal insight into your argument construction and fallacies. But perhaps I am mistaken to assume you construct arguments to learn what the truth is as a philosopher would rather than simply declare an already held position or to attack those (ideas or person) you disagree with like a sophist.
I apologize for not getting back to this sooner; I often forget to check my gmail account, especially when the semester is ending.
"Re: gardeners as experts. You remain obsessed with the ideas of expert opinions and credentials. You embrace several logical fallacies here."
No. For this to be a logical fallacy you would have to be relying on someone who is not an expert in the field in question. Sort of like relying on gardeners for advice on climate change. If we couldn’t rely on people who actually are experts our lives would much, much harder.
"Firstly, even laymen can speak the truth."
I agree. But when laymen disagree with the research of the majority of experts those laymen tend to look kind of silly.
Secondly, even a list that include non-expert can remain truthful and e"xpert in its conclusion."
Yes, but if the progenitors of this list are attempting to proffer it as a list of experts who disagree, then it seems odd to call it good methodology when it does not exist as the thing it claims to be.
"Thirdly you still do not understand that attacking the credential of gardeners is not equivalent to attacking the message they carry."
Again, nowhere did I attack the credentials of gardeners. I attacked the idea that a list of supposed experts would be taken seriously when some of these “experts” were not at all what the progenitors of the list indicated.
"Please link to any of my posts that have been racist or extreme. I have never suggested that African Americans are in anyway inferior to any other culture or ethnic groups. I do believe their current culture is deleterious for themselves."
This is the specific comment I related: “Final thought. The biggest problem with racism in the US is not bigotry but the culture of victimhood when you are a minority. i hope that with Obama's win there will be less "woe is me because America is KKK."
Not only are you wrong in that thinking, but it is decidedly offensive to blame the victim when dealing with anything that is wrong in itself. Of course there are people who use racism in their favor or as an excuse, but you don’t single people out here; you lump an entire race into the category of whiners.
"In a previous post I spoke of the strategic choices the African American community made between Booker T Washington & WEB Du Bois. The consequences of that choice I have seen first hand, and have contrasted with the response of other ethnic minorities like East Asians and South Asians, even Latin Americans. I believe they have made the wrong choice and are suffering for it. I also believe they can redress this error as it is not too late. Even some African American leaders acknowledge this as well, Bill Cosby being a popular example. Again, I understand many might disagree with this interpretation and I have no problems with that, but to suggest I have racist ideas because of it is absurd. However it is in line with your continued reliance of disparaging the messenger rather than confronting the merit of the message."
Actually, I am confronting the message in your racism. Whenever you attempt to call a group of people one thing you lose all credibility. Surely you’ve heard of the invalid syllogism equating mortality and Socrates? For your conclusion to be true your premises also have to be true. So, it would go something like this:
1.“African Americans” refers to a group of people.
2.The strategic choices the African American community made between Booker T Washington & WEB Du Bois were bad.
3. Therefore, the group of people known as African Americans made bad choices.
The reason that doesn’t work is because you’ve made an assumption of truth in your second premise that can’t be demonstrated. The reason it can’t be demonstrated is because it is a value judgment and it refers to a diverse group of people who cannot be easily quantified. Any huge categorization like the one you made won’t work because it refers to something that is in constant change and has diverse motivations and outcomes. It’s the same thing anyone does who wishes to stereotype people of any group as having one trait; it never works when you’re dealing with something as variable and nonexistent in nature as human behavior.
"I have seen what the culture of victimhood has done first hand."
Your anecdotal evidence is meaningless. Every semester I see tremendous, amazing fortitude, perseverance, intelligence, and integrity from African American students; whose experience is more relevant?
:I am not stretching the truth but I am certain I have done more to help alleviate the suffering of African Americans with actual work than to just talk about it. I have also worked to further advance their standing in my profession."
Good for you. But that does nothing to alleviate the racism in your earlier comment. After all, people can have “black friends” and still be racist against African Americans.
:Some of us actually do what we can, not just talk on what should or could be."
Nice dig, there. Though I would imagine that teaching 90 or so college students every 5 months to reason and understand equality is fairly indicative of action.
"The biggest problem with racism in the US currently is not bigotry but the culture of victimhood when you are a minority."
I really wonder where you got this idea. I doubt you’d find it to be the case if you were African American or disabled. But you're not, so this thinking is nothing but luxurious.
"African Americans will shortly be represented in all levels of government, business and education. Actual bigotry, while undoubtedly still exist, is becoming less and less of a problem."
I agree.
"Yet, African American culture remains dysfunctional with high divorce rates and single parenthood, crime and incarceration, or employment and education."
See, this is where you lose the validity of your argument. All of those things that you mention can be attributable to a cultural war on African Americans from the earliest incidence of this country. There is no way we have equity of opportunity in the United States. Not even close. When school financing is tied to property values the poorer neighborhoods will always lose out. When kids are “graduating” from school without being able to read or write, that’s a problem for them and one that indicates a direct failure of the society itself.
"Some African Americans have come to the same conclusion as I have through direct research and discovery, Thomas Sowell being one."
Some African Americans have also come to the conclusion that there is a leprechaun in a tree in Alabama through “direct research.” Are they correct?
"If by “evidence and reason based ideology” you are referring to global warming I know I have a sharper mind to analyze scientific data than most. In fact I do it regularly when reading journals and reports. I understand the difference between a hypothesis driven research and a bias driven agenda. I can also evaluate both methodology and limitations of data for both analysis and conclusions."
Apparently, you are smarter than 99% of scientists, then. That certainly would make one wonder why you aren’t world famous by now.
"Hard data for man made global warming is scant. Simply put, we do not have sufficient data to support the existence of man made global warming, especially since we have only recorded data for about 200 years or so, which is scant when the history of the earth have clearly demonstrated ice ages melting long before Man knew how to make fire."
It’s interesting that you don’t deny global warming, you just deny that it is man made. What is your explanation for the rapidity of global climate change? If it is a natural process, what is it driving this extreme tilt down?
"I too have been disappointed with your extremism and have stated it previously. You have a sharp brain but have a penchant to think emotionally and personally rather than rationally. You tend to attack people rather than ideas. When you do confront the ideas, you then tend to react emotionally rather than consider potential validity of the matter or the alternative conclusion. A trained rational mind would seek to prove the null hypothesis first rather than disprove the null hypothesis first."
Blah, blah, blah. Seriously, I’ve never attacked a single person in this discussion, but you continue to claim that I have, all the while disparaging me! It’s odd.
"Your attacks and word choices regarding Sarah Palin clearly exemplifies this emotive irrationality."
Oh, I agree that I was emotional about Sarah Palin. I do tend to get emotional when people celebrate willful ignorance as if it is a good thing. But that has nothing to do with this discussion on climate change, so… I’ve seen you react with emotion before but I am not assuming that every reaction you will have is emotional. You seem to be fond of over simplification.
"I have never even approach that level of hate in my disapproval of Obama (or for that matter, any ideas or groups with whom I have disagreed) with what I have posted on my blog, in personal conversation or private thoughts."
Again, this has what to do with the current discussion? The fact that you don’t “hate” Obama or approach him with “hate” has nothing to do with climate change or the discussion of it.
"For example, read this post where I compare Obama to McCain. The problem with emotional arguments isn’t simply the diminishing objectivity in order to evidence the truth but blindness to one’s own bias."
That’s not entirely true. Being human is not all reasonable, nor is it all emotional. Would you need reason if you didn’t first feel something that needed some sort of reasonable address? Not only is emotion a key element of being human, it is also a key element in a reasonable discussion. You can pretend dispassion all you want but that does not change the fact that you are emotionally tied to your ideas beyond simple reason. I can logically argue for the inherent wrong that is raping a child all day but the truth will remain that I feel emotionally tied to the outcome of such an argument as much as I believe it is based in reason. Now, for objectivity: Why is it that you follow the exact ideological party line of the neo-cons? How could you be seen to have objectivity? Is there anything on which you disagree with that part of the conservative movement? I find it hard to believe that you have found an ideological movement that matches your thinking exactly. That would certainly be remarkable, wouldn’t it?
"I hope you can gain some personal insight into your argument construction and fallacies. But perhaps I am mistaken to assume you construct arguments to learn what the truth is as a philosopher would rather than simply declare an already held position or to attack those (ideas or person) you disagree with like a sophist."
I find it interesting that you continue to make these bold claims and expect them to be true without demonstration. Did you take symbolic logic as an undergrad?
Post a Comment