Posted on 02/12/2007 6:09:00 AM PST by pissant
Edited on 02/12/2007 1:34:05 PM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity
Mon Feb 12 2007 09:10:09 ET
Czech president Vaclav Klaus has criticized the UN panel on global warming, claiming that it was a political authority without any scientific basis.
In an interview with "Hospodárské noviny", a Czech economics daily, Klaus answered a few questions:
Q: IPCC has released its report and you say that the global warming is a false myth. How did you get this idea, Mr President?•
A: It's not my idea. Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment. Also, it's an undignified slapstick that people don't wait for the full report in May 2007 but instead respond, in such a serious way, to the summary for policymakers where all the "but's" are scratched, removed, and replaced by oversimplified theses.• This is clearly such an incredible failure of so many people, from journalists to politicians. If the European Commission is instantly going to buy such a trick, we have another very good reason to think that the countries themselves, not the Commission, should be deciding about similar issues.•
Q: How do you explain that there is no other comparably senior statesman in Europe who would advocate this viewpoint? No one else has such strong opinions...•
A: My opinions about this issue simply are strong. Other top-level politicians do not express their global warming doubts because a whip of political correctness strangles their voice.
• Q: But you're not a climate scientist. Do you have a sufficient knowledge and enough information?•
A: Environmentalism as a metaphysical ideology and as a worldview has absolutely nothing to do with natural sciences or with the climate. Sadly, it has nothing to do with social sciences either. Still, it is becoming fashionable and this fact scares me. The second part of the sentence should be: we also have lots of reports, studies, and books of climatologists whose conclusions are diametrally opposite.• Indeed, I never measure the thickness of ice in Antarctica. I really don't know how to do it and don't plan to learn it. However, as a scientifically oriented person, I know how to read science reports about these questions, for example about ice in Antarctica. I don't have to be a climate scientist myself to read them. And inside the papers I have read, the conclusions we may see in the media simply don't appear. But let me promise you something: this topic troubles me which is why I started to write an article about it last Christmas. The article expanded and became a book. In a couple of months, it will be published. One chapter out of seven will organize my opinions about the climate change.• Environmentalism and green ideology is something very different from climate science. Various findings and screams of scientists are abused by this ideology.•
Q: How do you explain that conservative media are skeptical while the left-wing media view the global warming as a done deal?•
A: It is not quite exactly divided to the left-wingers and right-wingers. Nevertheless it's obvious that environmentalism is a new incarnation of modern leftism.•
Q: If you look at all these things, even if you were right ...•
A: ...I am right...•
Q: Isn't there enough empirical evidence and facts we can see with our eyes that imply that Man is demolishing the planet and himself?•
A: It's such a nonsense that I have probably not heard a bigger nonsense yet.•
Q: Don't you believe that we're ruining our planet?•
A: I will pretend that I haven't heard you. Perhaps only Mr Al Gore may be saying something along these lines: a sane person can't. I don't see any ruining of the planet, I have never seen it, and I don't think that a reasonable and serious person could say such a thing. Look: you represent the economic media so I expect a certain economical erudition from you. My book will answer these questions. For example, we know that there exists a huge correlation between the care we give to the environment on one side and the wealth and technological prowess on the other side. It's clear that the poorer the society is, the more brutally it behaves with respect to Nature, and vice versa.• It's also true that there exist social systems that are damaging Nature - by eliminating private ownership and similar things - much more than the freer societies. These tendencies become important in the long run. They unambiguously imply that today, on February 8th, 2007, Nature is protected uncomparably more than on February 8th ten years ago or fifty years ago or one hundred years ago.• That's why I ask: how can you pronounce the sentence you said? Perhaps if you're unconscious? Or did you mean it as a provocation only? And maybe I am just too naive and I allowed you to provoke me to give you all these answers, am I not? It is more likely that you actually believe what you say.
[English translation from Harvard Professor Lubos Motl]
Developing...
There it is again, metaphysical ideology. Every single issue in the political divide can be broken down to post modern metaphysics vs. reality and logic. Harvard's revising its curriculum to make it more post modern, the prosecutor in the Duke lacrosse case used post modern law, and I think the same thing is happening in the Libby case. (The prosecutor doesn't really have to prove his case because everyone knows that the Bush administration is viscious, secretive and manipulative, and would try to use the press to influence public opinion.)
Europe is being run by idiot children. When the lean mean murderous savages from the desert come, there will be no contest.
(Approximate non-chemist answer)
"President of Czech Republic Calls Man-Made Global Warming a 'Myth' - Questions Gore's Sanity"
In a sane world this would be a "Dog Bites Man" non-story.
So we should all be walking around laughing our heads off?
GLOBAL WARMING PING
In reality, ozone and oxides of nitrogen are both quite beneficial at ground level. Oxides of nitrogen enable trees to produce more cellulose, which is the structural element of plants. Ozone is beneficial to all creatures that have lungs, because it aids in regulating the plentiful bacteria that attack them constantly. The reason that they both were declared to be "smog" is because they gang up to give the lower atmosphere a yellow color which people have been conned into believing is harmful.
What is really harmful, and extremely so, is the H2S and other sulphur compounds that are produced by the catalytic converters on gasoline powered vehicles. They are the cause of the burning in your throat and eyes when driving up a long steep grade.
I don't think Gore's sanity is in question. ;')
They didn't save us from global warming here in Arizona. Before their report we were getting lows in the 20's and highs in the 50's to 60's. Since we have hit the 80's twice and stayed in the 50's most nights. Of course as I write this, our local news tells us tommorrow will be cooler and a good chance of rain. I am so confused. Paging Al Gore.
I have seen that. My cats were chasing my uncle's little chiwawa around. He got a bit to close I guess. I was shocked to see the fat one actually chasing him. It was hillarious.
Uh-oh. I though you wrote cats chasing dogs. I must still be dizzy from them chasing him.
Good gawd, you're right! Scientists (the real ones, anyway) have been searching for that theory since Einstein, and they've been looking in the wrong place all along! Just think of the ramifications:
Your honor, my client is innocent--he's a victim of Global Warming®....
I didn't do my homework because of Global Warming®, teacher...
Sorry I'm late to work, boss, but Global Warming® was murder this morning....
I'm divorcing you, Elizabeth. It's not you, it's...Global Warming®!
Prague is a beautiful place. You won't be sorry.
bookmark
Interesting thing about the Eastern Europeans is that they are much more skeptical of political correctness and liberalism than Americans, even though they were raised by communists. One major difference is that the Soviet leftists did not want their men to be docile and effeminate. Submission to the collective was done with brutal threat of force, not through guilt manipulation.
Absolutely correct.
There are no comprehensive scientific tests that support the global warming hypothesis... Or any other tests for that matter.
Questions Gore's Sanity
Yes, AlGore appears to need a psychologist.
BRAVO!
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.