Posted on 10/18/2007 6:57:32 AM PDT by ZGuy
"20/20” co-anchor John Stossel is going on the attack against “experts” who warn about manmade global warming – along the way berating Al Gore for saying the debate over climate change is over.
In a release from ABC previewing Stossel’s report on Friday’s “20/20,” the veteran newsman and Newsmax pundit – who won 19 Emmys exposing scammers and con artists – says:
“This week on ‘20/20’ (in our new 8 p.m. Eastern time slot) I say ‘Give Me a Break!’ to our Nobel Prize-winning Vice President.
“Mr. Gore says ‘The debate is over,’ and those who disagree with his take on global warming have been ‘purchased’ in order to create ‘the illusion of a debate.’ Nonsense. It's as if the Vice President and his allies in the environmental movement plan to win the debate through intimidation. I interview some scientists who won't be intimidated, even though one has had his life threatened for speaking up.
“The Vice President's much-applauded movie, ‘An Inconvenient Truth,’ claims warming is man’s fault and a coming crisis! While the earth has certainly warmed over the last century, plenty of independent scientists say scientists cannot be sure that man caused the warming or that warming will be a crisis.
“They say the computer models that are used to predict the disasters don’t include important variables because scientists don’t fully understand them. For example, warming may cause cloud formations that reflect sun and cool the earth. The computer models cannot know. These scientists call global warming activism more of a religious movement than science.”
Gore's film is filled with “misleading messages,” says Stossel.
“It suggests polar bears are disappearing and that ‘sea levels worldwide would go up 20 feet.’ I interview children who are scared. They believe the polar bears are already going extinct and that the oceans will soon rise even higher than 20 feet, drowning them and their parents.
“But polar bear populations appear to be steady or increasing, and a 20-foot rise is a theoretical possibility that wouldn't happen for millennia. The IPCC, the group that shared last week’s Nobel Prize with the Vice President, says in 100 years the oceans might rise 7 to 24 inches, not 20 feet. Now a British judge has ruled that British schools must disclose to students nine inaccuracies in ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ if they play the movie in class.”
Stossel said it’s “nonsense” for Gore to suggest that we can stop global warming by doing things like changing light bulbs and driving less.
“The only practical thing we can do today that would make a difference in CO2 output is to launch a major shift toward nuclear energy. But the environmental movement rarely utters the word nuclear.
“I suspect that next year's government boondoggle will be massive spending on carbon-reducing technology.
“It reminds me of George Mason University Economics Department Chairman Don Boudreax's suggestion that such schemes really mean ‘government seizing enormous amounts of additional power in order to embark upon schemes of social engineering - schemes whose pursuit gratifies the abstract fantasies of the theory class and, simultaneously, lines the very real pockets of politically powerful corporations, organizations, and “experts."’
“He is so right. The abstract fantasies of the theory class will soon send huge chunks of your money to politicians, friends, activist scientists, and politically savvy corporations.
“The debate is over? That makes me say GIVE ME A BREAK!”
Thats my feeling on the matter. I will grant them that lowering CO2 emissions is probably a good thing. Yes, I remain sceptical, but I'll grant them that. But for me, the issue is primarily driven by a desire the get alternative sources of energy in use by the USA, in order to ensure our future prosperity, regardless of what the whackjobs in the rest of the world do.
Any chance of getting a copy of that list with the links shown? I’d like a copy of the links for future reference, but cut and paste doesn’t see past the hyperlinks to the actually addresses. Thanks!
Well there goes all the value of my carbon credits...
All you have to do is ask a global warming believer how Mars is warming up.
“Mr. Gore says ‘The debate is over,’ and those who disagree with his take on global warming have been ‘purchased’ in order to create ‘the illusion of a debate.’
I've always loved this 'debate is over' argument...Wonder what would happen if conservatives used this tactic?...
Abortion? The debate is over, we must ban it. Death tax? The debate is over, get rid of it. Social Security? The debate is over, let individuals handle their own retirement. Immigration? The debate is over - build the wall, lock down visas, deport illegals.
It’s the mustache... right? I have dreams about the mustache...
Global warming denier! DENIER!!!
j/k =)
Hah!
It’s either the stache, or his “#1 myth” from his “Top 10 Myths” program on ABC -
The number one myth?
“Sharing is good” - he trashes socialism’s belief in public over private ownership. PERFECT!
In your Browser, View Source, then on that page, do a Find for Basic References. That should take you to the post, and you’ll see all the HTML coding with the URLs available to you.
the ruins of those villages must be interesting, gotta be a documentary soon! =o)
I highly recomend the book “Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming” by Bjorn Lomborg.
He makes the point repeatedly that the fears are way overblown, that there are more lives saved from “cold deaths” than those added by “heat deaths”, and that in a world with finite resources to spend on improving living conditions for humans, investing in carbon emission reduction has the least bang-for-the-buck by a long shot.
Water treatment, AIDS/HIV treatment, disease control, irrigation, etc all have much higher paybacks.
He also makes the point very well about the adaptability fo humans to changing climate.
Highly recommended!
I recently tried to post a response (I have been a regular on the “Readers’ Responses” page for over seven years—til now) on a Wall Street Journal editorial similiar to this one.But Opinionjournal.com has blacklisted me ever since I pointed out their constitutional hypocrisy and elitist ersatz conservatism as regards their seditious and avarice-driven stance on the illegal alien invasion currently seeding our holy land with scofflaw weeds and outlaw “rape trees.”
Anyhoo,back in 1991,Professor and Chairman of the Philosophy Department at Ulyanovsk State University in Russia,Valentine A. Bezhanov,wrote an essay about the junk science (the old boy saw it first hand)that buttressed the evil programs of the once defunct but now refulgent totalitarian state of Russia.Dissidents such as he in the Old Soviet Union called it “shadow science.”
Al Gore’s “The Inconvenient Truth” and it’s it nefarious laurels bears a terryfying in it’s repercussions resemblence to Stalin’s “Convenient Factoids” during the Soviet era of “shadow science.”
Prof.Bazhanov wrote:
“Advancement as a Soviet [or leftist] “scientist” is more a means for career benefits than the discovery of truth.The processes by which decisions in science take place for non-scholary reasons can be called “shadow science.”
Contrived liberal misanthropic “climate change” avoids the past negative proggresive (socialist) ideals with new proggresive (the new Nixon,as it were)”positive” ideals.Still the same leftist system however,money and power availiable only to the most political and clever than to the most principaled and competent.
Prof.Bazhanov concludes:
“I have given evidence of the importance of shadow science within Soviet [leftist] science—or should we say,imitation of science? In any case the product is dull [as in obtuse]science and the only product of dull science is more dull science.Rather than producing scientists with lively minds,they are produced with a death grip [or the fear of the tyranny of an ideologically biased consensus].”
The neocommunists and theophobes (they who hate God)will never stop.The earth will abide—can we?
Things the Nobel Committee Doesn’t Want You to Know
Global Warming on Free Republic
I have a friend who live’s along the Ocean in south Florida who is absolutely terrified that her home and town are going to be flooded by the “twenty foot” rise in seas level Gore predicts.
I keep telling her not to worry.
ping
"In this context, about 982, Erik sailed to a somewhat mysterious and little-known land. He rounded the southern tip of the island (later known as Cape Farewell) and sailed up the western coast. He eventually reached a part of the coast that, for the most part, seemed ice-free and consequently had conditions — similar to those of Iceland — that promised growth and future prosperity. According to the Saga of Erik the Red, he spent his three years of exile exploring this land. He named this land "Greenland" because he wanted to attract other people to it."
This one is repeated often enough on FR that I think I'll add it to my profile. I actually learned that this was the origin of the name on FR.
Ask me (see my profile for my answer).
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.