How society should proceed in the face of a changing climate is the business of politics. Political arguments about climate change are routinely mistaken for scientific ones.
Scientific method involves consideration of all of the facts, not just the ones you agree with. The new US Senate Report sponsored by Senator Imhofe may widen the discussion of climate change to a more productive level.
Contrary to what many believe, there is no scientific consensus on how society should proceed in the face of a changing climate. The evidence of the IPCC needs to be treated for what it is – not as
the last word on the science of climate change, but as a contribution
to a political process. A political process that has barely even
The IPCC is not, as is frequently claimed, 2500 of the worlds best climate scientists. The composition of the IPCC includes a website-designer, administrative assistants, and network administrator in the self-proclaimed group of "worlds best climate scientists".
This is precisely the misconception climate-resistance.org been challenging, following claims made by Andrew Dessler about the Imhofe 400 list.
The public remains unconvinced that the agenda pushed by global warming alarmists has merit. Some of us feel that all-expense paid trips to Bali on chartered jets are not a meaningful show of serious intent to help the situation.
More discussion and more facts may lead to more useful conclusions. My personal favorites involve the relatively ignored effects of solar cycles.
0 Responses to Confusing science with politics