Posted on 02/27/2007 9:32:25 AM PST by jazusamo
Do you think those who have reservations about whether man is creating global warming should lose their jobs and be denied the right to present their views?
Over the last few months, there has been a concerted effort to silence those who have doubts about global warming and man's effect on the climate. The Oregon State climatologist was fired for disagreeing with the "conventional wisdom." A meteorologist with the weather channel demanded that dissenting views not be broadcast. CNN, in particular, has treated skeptics with great disdain.
As an economist, I do not claim to know for certain who is right and who is wrong in this debate, but I do know that attempts to shut down debate are both wrong and dangerous. When I was a student, Keynesian economics was the "consensus," and those few who disagreed, like Milton Friedman and F.A. Hayek, were ridiculed by the economic establishment, and students in many universities were not even exposed to their views. By the late 1970s, it was apparent to those who cared to look at the data and the world around them that Keynesian economics had all been wrong and Friedman and Hayek had been right. Once Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan and other government leaders adopted the Friedman/Hayek model, their economies and also the world economy, entered the longest and highest rate of growth ever. History is filled with those who dissented against the conventional wisdom but were proved correct, such as Copernicus, Galileo, Albert Einstein and many others.
The doomsayers in the media and political classes were all atwitter last month when the most recent U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report was released, saying humans were partly to blame for global warming -- so I decided to read the report.
(Excerpt) Read more at washtimes.com ...
Ping
What? No he wasn't! He still has his job.
This is not possible. It's disheartening to read BS from the "wrong" side.
The final full, scientific report won't be available for a few more months, while it is being tweaked (redacted) to agree with what is availabe, the political "Summary".
I don't know who is being referred to.
Global warming is pure politics. It's got nothing to do with science. The same kind of parasites that live to suck off the teats of the UN are sucking off the taxpayers. What needs to be done is to start exposing the charlatans for what they are. Because they lack rigorous scientific skills, their earlier research and predictions should be full of obvious lies and erroneous predictions that can prove their scam nature.
It's become a religion, with its Goracle and hordes of deluded and demented earth worshipping gorons..
All of science, whether it is climatology or biology, benefit from open debate. Those who claim their discipline is settled, and would stifle further debate, are not doing themselves, nor humanity, any favors. The very nature of the scientific endeavor is exploration - the search for truth. And when one party to the debate seeks to silence the other, science, and humanity, are the losers.
True ... the full, final report is not available to us peons.
However, there are early drafts available even to us, and I suspect that there are more mature drafts available to those who are well connected.
The whole article is well worth reading, by the way.
Here's another nice excerpt:
"... if the politicians on the left operate true to course, they will propose even more costly regulations and higher taxes, without any offsetting tax reduction. This will unnecessarily make the poor poorer and reduce job creation. The brains of many on the left (and some on the right) seem unable to understand second-order effects of policies and actions, which tends to make them overstate problems and come up with solutions that do more harm than good.
"Vaclav Klaus, who is both a distinguished economist and president of the Czech Republic, criticized the new U.N. report on global warming, saying it was a political document, "without scientific basis." He also said, "a sane person can't conclude that we are ruining the planet" as Al Gore has said, given that the planet is now far more user friendly for humans than it has ever been in the past."
Today's Y2K. It's good for the economy, good for investments in new and improved technologies, and no one really gets hurt.
The climatologist in question wasn't the State of Oregon's climatologist. He was the climatologist of Oregon State...as in...the college/university. He lost his title of "climatologist of Oregon State" but still gets to teach AT Oregon State and still teaches climatology there.
Go figure....
"Because they lack rigorous scientific skills, their earlier research and predictions should be full of obvious lies and erroneous predictions that can prove their scam nature."
Your analysis is 100% correct. These fools are woefully ignorant of physics and chemistry both proven sciences which when properly applied disprove their slipshod theories.
Yes, the way I read it he stated he read the most recent report, not the full report.
Personally I'm still going with the Global Cooling theory, maybe in August I'll switch over to Global Warming. Actually we should probably institute a law that mandates when you switch, kinda like when we switch to and from Daylight Savings time.
I believe you have the most realistic approach. lol
My point is, what started out as a scientific panel on Climate change (IPCC) has degenerated into a political panel whose only goal is to "back up" a conclusion already assumed to be correct. That nasty science keeps getting in the way.
They should just change the name to IPACC (International Panel on Anthropogenic Climate Change) and be done with it.
Maybe I'm preaching to the choir here but...
It's sickening to see the left-wingers (here and in the third-world) crying about how the United States is supposedly creating another "holocaust" in the developing nations. Then they quickly switch over to say that the United States owes a "carbon debt" to the third world (no mention of the EU or any other industrialized nations) of about $13 Trillion annually. Wonderful. Just above the official figures of our GDP. How coincidental. Plus, as always, Bush is supposedly to blame for global warming, too.
It's the height of arrogance to say that we can change climate and totally ignore the much larger influence from the Earth, the Sun, etc. It's arrogant to conclude that this theory is unchangeable fact, based on a single movie, and to silence doubters. This is not scientific; this is a religious Inquisition. And, it's morally repugnant to dishonor the memory of the victims of the Nazi Holocaust in order to advance their left-wing agenda.
This is naught but a thinly-veiled ploy by extreme Earth-worshiping environmentalists who want to see humans (well, other than themselves) dead in the name of creating more "open space" and socialists who want to enslave the United States and her citizens for their own evil purposes.
The truly sad thing is that many Americans will fall for this trite bovine excrement.
LOL!
Is it any wonder that Joe and Jane Sixpack are thoroughly confused and clueless?
But they gets to vote. And they are easily scared.
The only good news is that no one seems to know who the "carbon debt" czar is, who appointed him, what powers does he have and how many tank and missile divisions are there backing him up...
If the most primitive and useless countries in the world get together and vote on something, does that make it inevitable? Enforceable?
Give me a break.
We don't yet have a world government (we never will) and it is never likely to be a "democratic" mobocracy.
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.