Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 02/21/2009 3:05:20 PM PST by EricTheRed_VocalMinority
“As the science keeps coming in on anthropogenic global warming (AGW), there continues to be one side of the debate that the science is supporting. The other side is losing support and is becoming more and more marginalized.”
This is a paraphrase of what was said to me by a friend who is thoroughly convinced of the “Gore trifecta”: (1) global warming is happening at an unprecedented rate, (2) it’s caused by man (and, therefore, can be stopped by man), and (3) its results will be catastrophic.
My response: Actually, I agree there is one side that’s being vindicated by the science as it keeps coming in and there is one side that is being more and more marginalized. Except, of course, the sides I had in mind were the complete opposite of what he was thinking.
I also told my friend that I understand his side more than he might think I do. It’s my responsibility to. You can’t debate the opposing side of any debate unless you understand it as best as possible. I also suggested my friend didn’t know the “skeptic” side of the AGW debate (and to his credit, he did agree to read a book of my choosing that challenges his position).
The bottom line is this: The past couple years the AGW side is losing on the basis of the science. The “hockey stick”? Gone. Out-of-control melting at the poles? Not happening. When scientists or public figures switch sides, it is usually from the direction of belief toward refutation.
(Excerpt) Read more at vocalminority.typepad.com ...
Who did he ever debate?
Which scientists?
When?
How can the debate be over if it never began?
How can the debate be over, if he never debated anyone?
Typical left-wingers.
What a stupid@ass.
Click on the image above to hear the idiot say it.
I’ve followed Singer’s work for years. He is an authoritative source.
See www.sepp.org
If the planet were to start cooling into an ice age cycle are we to believe Al Gore’s non agenda based solution would be that we need to start burning fossil fuels as much as possible to intetionally create the green house effect (which we can’t) and warm the planet? No, the answer to any global temperature problem (of which there currently is none)will always be that we need to burn less fossil fuels, and empower government to control more and more of our lives...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.