“their politics are irrelevant” - His *first sentence* was garbage about a ‘right wing attack on science’. Utter slanderous garbage to feed BS to leftie minions and keep them on the ‘reservation’ about hyped-up AGW fears. If his own politics is front and center, then its quite relevent, and his brand of politicized pseudo-science is everything *WRONG* about how the liberals/left approaches the issue. They dont just dispute the skeptics but slander and demonize them.
I am not asking for a ‘right wing source’, I am only asking that you not consider a biased leftwing source such as Tim Lambert as authoritative. This is not the first time you ref’d to him. You are giving away where you are really coming from with this BS, especially when you call non-partisan Pielke a “right-wing source” (WTF?!?!)
I consider him authoritative when he provides an explanation of a scientific subject that is comprehensibly explanatory.
You are giving away where you are really coming from with this BS, especially when you call non-partisan Pielke a “right-wing source”
If you don't discern Pielke Sr.'s slant, then your bias is compensating, too. I cite sources where I find the information required to support a point I make.
Wikipedia on Pielke Sr.:
Finally, he's a very accomplished scientist and I fully respect his views, though I don't completely agree with him.