Posted on 08/08/2005 5:31:46 AM PDT by OESY
...The drumbeat on global warming was intended to reach a crescendo during the run-up to the summit at Gleneagles. Prime Minister Blair has been a leader in the global warming crusade. (Whether his stance reflects simple conviction or the need to propitiate his party's Left after Iraq is unknown.) In the event, for believers, Gleneagles turned out to be a major disappointment.
On the eve of the summit, the Economic Committee of the House of Lords released a report sharply at variance with the prevailing European orthodoxy. Some key points were reported in the Guardian, a London newspaper not hostile to that orthodoxy:
• The science of climate change leaves "considerable uncertainty" about the future.
• There are concerns about the objectivity of the international panel of scientists that has led research into climate change.
• The Kyoto agreement to limit carbon emissions will make little difference and is likely to fail.
• The U.K.'s energy and climate policy contains "dubious assumptions" about renewable energy and energy efficiency.
Most notably, the Committee itself concluded that there are concerns about the objectivity of the IPCC [Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] process and about the IPCC's crucial emissions scenario exercise.....
Several additional observations: the IPCC was created to support a specific political goal. It is directed to support the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.... Statements by the leaders of the IPCC have been uninhibitedly political.
Second, science is not a matter of consensus, as the histories of Galileo, Copernicus, Pasteur, Einstein and others will attest. Science depends not on speculation but on conclusions verified through experiment. Verification is more than computer simulations -- whose conclusions mirror the assumptions built in the model. Irrespective of the repeated assertions regarding a "scientific consensus," there is neither a consensus nor is consensus science.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The House of Lords done good.
Regradless of which realm it is used in, the concept of Original Sin was invented with the same goal in mind: manipulation of people through unearned guilt and the empowerment and enrichment of a small oligarchy.
The Greens saw how well it worked in the religious realm and thought they would give it a try.
getting hard to keep your own house these days when your neighbors want to keep it for you.
noun
1a. A religion or religious sect generally considered to be extremist or false, with its followers often living in an unconventional manner under the guidance of an authoritarian, charismatic leader. b. The followers of such a religion or sect.
2. A system or community of religious worship and ritual.
3. The formal means of expressing religious reverence; religious ceremony and ritual.
4. A usually nonscientific method or regimen claimed by its originator to have exclusive or exceptional power in curing a particular disease.
5a. Obsessive, especially faddish, devotion to or veneration for a person, principle, or thing. b. The object of such devotion.
6. An exclusive group of persons sharing an esoteric, usually artistic or intellectual interest.
I wish every schoolkid would be taught this, but since most teachers were not introduced to Logic in their Education classes, my wish is futile.
He states the obvious, but the question is why there aren't 1 million scientists saying it.
I think you are guilty of the same kind of assumptions of which you accuse the greens. Please tell us who you think "invented" the concept and how you discerned their motive.
I think a case could be easier made to suggest the opposite of your conclusion.
This so called Global Warming is junk science dreamed up by the socialist. No one can ever convince me that mankind can destroy this planed we live on. The man who build it will do that when the time comes.
Coal mine fires in China emit more greenhouse gases than every US automobile East of the Mississippi River. The low hanging fruit is greenhouse gas reduction is not squeezing another 3 mpg out of my Honda Civic.
In early June, Greenpeace communists boasted that 1,000 of its useful idiots stormed Ford dealerships across Britian and chained themselves to “gas guzzling” Land Rovers.
The Marxists claim that these vehicles contribute to so-called global warming. Missing in its “claim” is the fact that Greenpeace is opposed to all manner of free enterprise, including people providing money for their families by building Land Rovers.
Anyway, police arrived and removed four of the utopian leeches chained to steering wheels, somehow missing the other 996 protestors. Perhaps they chained themselves to the driveshaft.
“They are all a bunch of idiots,” said one buyer before driving away in his new Range Rover.
I'm not an expert in theology, but the way I understand it, the notion of Original Sin was not that we are born guilty but that we are born with a natural proclivity to commit evil and that we must resist the urge.
They want us to live in caves.
I think a close examination would show an alliance between "green" groups and large multinational corporations and investment banking firms.
Something is terribly wrong with "science" when volcanic activity deep beneath the oceans surface is dismissed as a likely cause of warm ocean currents. Self described "scientists" claim a .5 degree increase in the ambient air temp near the oceans surface is capable of producing a warm current 5 to 7 degrees hotter than surrounding water.
Something is terribly wrong with "science" when the burning of millions of evergreen trees owned by American taxpayers every year is dismissed as a cause of CO2 increases in the earth's atmosphere. The "greens" really believe that burning millions of trees every year is a good way to protect forests owned by American taxpayers from devastating wildfires.
By imposing carbon standards on small family owned manufacturing businesses in the U.S., "greens" can get those businesses shut down. Those jobs are sent to third world countries where large multinational corporations can set up very profitable manufacturing operations producing consumer goods for the U.S. market and where investment banking firms have large outstanding loans.
Bump
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.