Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unchanging Science
Weekly Standard ^ | Nov 28, 2011 | JOSEPH BOTTUM and WILLIAM ANDERSON

Posted on 11/25/2011 8:09:47 AM PST by Minn

In retrospect, we probably should have paid more attention when, around 2005, activists shifted their primary vocabulary from global warming to climate change to describe the impact of human beings on this biosphere we call the Earth. Both phrases had been around for a while, of course. Global warming got its modern start back in 1975, when the journal Science published a feature asking, “Are We on the Brink of a Pronounced Global Warming?” In one form or another, climate change has been in use since the physicist Joseph Fourier wrote of the greenhouse effect in the 1820s. A child wearing goggles that say "Climate change kills" on them

For that matter, both are unexceptionable meteorological terms with reasonably clear meanings: global warming a particular species or instantiation of general changes in the globe’s climate. The public purpose of those words, however​—​the political intent: That was a different thing altogether. For decades, global warming seemed a powerful, dynamic term to use​—​an apocalyptic phrase that summoned a grim vision of the eschaton, our world reduced to a lifeless wasteland. The only trouble was that it required the world to be, you know, warming. Constantly. A cold winter, and people started to wonder. A chilly spring, and people started to doubt.

(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: climatechange; globalwarming; globalwarmingfraud; globalwarminghoax
A nice beat down of Warmie logic.
1 posted on 11/25/2011 8:09:56 AM PST by Minn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Minn

True science is not consensual but factual. The AGW crowd has now been exposed as nothing more than agenda driven money grabbers who use ‘science’ to advance their political and financial goals.


2 posted on 11/25/2011 8:22:25 AM PST by JPG (The loons at OWS will soon be at each others throats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Minn
Excellent, clearly articulated argument against consensus in the Global Warming debate. I like this part:

Those afflicted with what economists call “perverse incentives,” however, want scientific consensus to exist, and they try, hard, to pull that consensus into being. Naturally, the debate is skewed toward the faction which controls the most political and economic resources​...

3 posted on 11/25/2011 8:42:14 AM PST by BigBobber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Minn; rdl6989; bamahead; Nervous Tick; SteamShovel; Tunehead54; golux; tubebender; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

4 posted on 11/25/2011 8:48:11 AM PST by steelyourfaith (If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Minn

Excellent article. Thank you for posting.


5 posted on 11/25/2011 9:20:36 AM PST by TheMightyQuinn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson