Phil Valentine's film attacks Al Gore, global warming claims

The Tennessean | 1/29/12 | Anne Paine

[SmithL]

Gannett Newspaper - Link Only:

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20120129/NEWS11/301270118/Phil-Valentine-s-film-attacks-Al-Gore-global-warming-claims?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

[SmithL]

[palmer]

From the article:Included [in the film] are claims that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, that scientific consensus has not been reached — or alternately that consensus is not useful or desirable — and that there is no evidence that humans are contributing to climate change.

These are not all substantive criticisms. Saying that CO2 is or is not a "pollutant" is meaningless. There is some consensus: CO2 does warm the atmosphere and increasing amounts will warm it more. But there is little consensus on how much and none on predictions (or claims) of catastrophe. It is true that there is no incontrovertible evidence that humans contribute to (ill-defined) climate change, warming has other explanations. But there is also no incontrovertible evidence that natural factors explain all of the warming. It is most likely a combination.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[Dr. Bogus Pachysandra]

“It is most likely a combination. “

With Man’s contribution in the 1 parts per billion range!

[palmer]

Maybe, may not. There are a variety of natural factors that could explain the rise from the 70’s through 1998, but none explain it all. I have read many articles (in links here and elsewhere) that proclaim that it is all positive PDO or AMO or lower cosmic rays or (etc), but none of those articles can quantifiably explain the rise. A combination of those might, or a combination of those and rising CO2.