47 thoughts on “Lindzen: A recent exchange in the Boston Globe clearly illustrated the sophistic nature of the defense of global warming alarmâ€
************************************************************
daveandrews723 says:
But those 8 scientists are “saving the worldâ€, don’t yuo know? Just ask them. Oh, and they have also built very nice careers for themselves with the HUGE increases in climate science grants over the past couple of decades. Those junkets to Paris, Copenhagen, etc. aren’t cheap. But only a cynic (skeptic) would accuse them of putting their egos and self-interest ahead of science.
************************
Santa Baby says:
No they are not saving the World. They are in fact destroying the World in order to save Marxism?
***************************************************
Goldrider says:
Soooo . . . let’s write a rebuttal and dispute them, point by point. That’s what it’s going to take for the average newsbag to start dismissing this stuff as the sophistry it is.
******************************************************
jayhd says:
“limited understanding and short-sighted interpretation of basic elements of climate scienceâ€
What is “climate science� From what I have read and observed, most of the climate scientists who perpetuate the AGW hoax are anything but scientists. Pre-eminent among them is Michael Mann, who refuses to release his data and methodology. Mann has no problem suing those who disagree with him, but refuses to answer interrogatories from those he is suing. And rather than debate the merits of their science and findings, the AGW proponents resort to name calling, personal attacks and attempt to stifle debate on the subject through legislative and governmental decree. So to me, “climate science†is on par with astrology and phrenology. In other words, it’s not science.
***************************************************************
*************************************EXCERPTS********************************
David L. Hagen says:
Lindzen eloquently exposes the “climate shmexpertsâ€! See Marc Fitch Shmexperts: How Ideology and Power Politics are Disguised as Science
We are constantly bombarded with studies and so-called expert opinions that are contradictory, controversial, and ineffective
Fitch explains why we need to apply common sense critical thinking to sift the “wheat from chaff†in such exchanges.
The Younger Dryas evidence Lindzen cites is expertly addressed by Don Easterbrook.
That's a little overboard. I don't recall astrologists or phrenologists acting like bratty spoiled children when someone disagrees with them. Nor have they acted like fascists trying to use the power of government to punish those who do.