Hm. Could it possibly be because Climate Science even more Climate Science hasn't demonstrated a single infinitesimal iota in which to support Changing Climate Policy??!!??
Because it is not science, Obamaholes.
"Andrew C. Revkin is an American, non-fiction, science and environmental writer. He has written on a wide range of subjects including destruction of the Amazon rain forest, the 2004 Asian tsunami, science and politics, climate change, and the North Pole. A reporter for the New York Times from 1995–2009, Revkin currently writes the Dot Earth environmental blog for The Times' Opinion Pages. He is also Senior Fellow for Environmental Understanding at the Pace Academy for Applied Environmental Studies at Pace University,[1] as well as a songwriter and musician."
Global Warming exists to make liberals rich.
Man cannot control Mother Nature.
In the short run, no. And this is not only because of disinformation campaigns, as some would assert.
The panel can freshen up its assessment all it wants. The assessment by the panel is unscientific and thus fatally flawed.
The panel committed a no no. They started with the premise that global warming is caused by mankind, and then selected data that supports their faux hypothesis. They also modified temperature records to better suit their desired findings. Scientists frown on such an approach.
The well-documented disinformation has come from the panel members.
Climate change is caused by the Sun, not you.
this just in:
Latest Climate Science Estimates Predict Doubling of the Flow of That Famous River in Egypt
Astounding the people are still flogging this dead, old horse of man-made climate change.
One has to assume it’s because there’s so much cash in it for all the yea-sayers.