I was invited to be on the Murnaghan programme on Sky News this morning – which I always find a great deal more intelligent than the Andrew Marr alternative on the BBC. I declined because I did not want to get up and get a 7.30am train from Ramsgate on a Sunday morning. I had a meeting until 11.30pm last night planning a conference on human rights in Balochistan [I still tend to say Baluchistan], and I have a newly crowned tooth that seems not to want to settle down. But I am still worried by my own lack of energy, which is uncharacteristic. Is this old age?
I also have some serious work to do on my Burnes book, and next week I shall be staying in London to be in the British Library reading room for every second of its opening hours. So there may be a bit of a posting hiatus. I have in mind a short post on an important subject on which I suspect that 99% of my readership – including the regular dissident commenters – will strongly disagree with me.
This is a peculiarly introspective post, perhaps because my tooth is hurting, but I seem to have this curmudgeonly spirit which wishes to react to the huge popularity of this blog by posting something genuinely held but unpopular; a genuine view but one I don’t normally trumpet. The base thought seems to be “You wouldn’t like me if you really knew me”.
Similarly when I wrote Murder in Samarkand I was being hailed as a hero by quite a lot of people for my refusal to go along with the whole neo-con disaster of illegal wars, extraordinary rendition and severe attacks on civil liberties, sacrificing my fast track diplomatic career as a result. My reaction to putative hero worship was to publish in Murder in Samarkand not just the political facts, but an exposure of my own worst and most unpleasant behaviour in my private life.
I am in a very poor position to judge, but I believe the result rather by accident turned out artistically compelling, if you don’t want to read the book you can get a good idea of that by clicking on David Tennant in the top right of this blog and listening to him playing me in David Hare’s radio adaptation.
Anyway, that’s enough musing. You won’t like my next post, whenever it comes. Promise.
As a lateral thought buddies our Sun revolves around Sirius and our solar system revolves around the center of the Milky Way according to Mayan and recent observations. Can this affect climate change? When all is said and done everything relates to to the cosmos.
Scousebilly
…and you asked that the man be heard out, which I obliged. I’m just not sure what was meant to be heard. Rather than take me up on anything I posted, you simply switch to another strand. This is suggestive of dogma rather than enquiry
I find Dr Ball’s background on sourcewatch.org to be far more revealing in terms of understanding his position in the debate than his own ‘c.v.’ (and I use the quote marks advisedly) which is the most disturbingly vague such effort I think I have ever seen. Still don’t know what his PhD is. He says where and when he got it, but not what field it was in, which is a curious way to present on a c.v.
Mark, that is a very pertinent observation – in fact, there is a theory attributed largely to Henrik Svensmark that suggests just that.
In a nutshell, cosmic rays are hypothesised to ionise particles (aerosols) in our atmosphere that in turn nucleate (seed) clouds.
With increased sunspot activity more cosmic rays enter our atmosphere and more clouds are seeded reflecting more of the suns energy back into space before it can warm the surface – during the Dalton and Maunder minima (little ice ages) there was more sunspot activity observed and this has been proposed as the reason for the colder climate.
It is the basis for the Cloud experiment at CERN.
see The Cloud Mystery (Danish TV Documentary):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANMTPF1blpQ
That’s right Geoff – Dr Ball has been persecuted for questioning the consensus!
Mark, Correction: been a while but it’s absence of sunspots (magnetic activity) that allows the cosmic rays in.
@ deepgreenpuddock,
Was the explanation of the aphid and greenfly ‘flux’, and the subsequent flux of ladybirds, of the mid 70s, ever definitively expounded? I’ve seen great changes in the relatively long term make-up of bird and animal life on the Isle of Wight, from the 60s onward, to know first hand that extreme shifts have occurred. But I’m not convinced that it was global warming that was/is the culprit. Weather patterns can explain short term fluxes, and climate change can account for long term changes; then again so can farming practices, and their ever potent and efficient large scale use of pesticides. The latter has a political lobby that can stop research dead [nothing to see here, move along], whereas the former can be made a cause celebre for ‘crowd control’, and scare tax harvesting.
Regarding the credibility of modern science, I’m convinced that it is imploding, even in the relatively robust disciplines like physics and chemistry.
For example:
I was doing a PhD in liquid crystal physics at Manchester University in the early 90s, and as I had won an award for experimental excellence at Manchester Poly [don’t laugh 🙂 ], I was invited to be a lab demonstrator for the 3rd year undergrad physics. One of the experiments in that lab revolved around the students measuring the time for a liquid crystal to switch in a cell, at various applied driving voltages, and varying temperatures. All good undergrad stuff.
Two students were assigned [volunteered] for that particular experiment, which would involve working on it for several Thursdays; so they had more than plenty of time to perform measurements, ‘research’, models, and presentation. I was informed that one of the students was destined to win the student of the year award, the other student [they would work as a team, and share the marks] was a very assertive Greek student.
The labs were a fifth of the final years assessment, so stakes were high. The equipment was already set up for them, so all that was left was to follow the ‘lab script’ as far as objectives were concerned, the methods of analysis was left up to the student, to shine with their techniques.
With relatively high voltages, the oscilloscope gave a well behaved time trace for the students to record; but at lower voltages, the trace developed an ‘anomalous bump’. I bit my tongue, and encouraged the students to ‘discover’ the cause of the anomaly, and left them to it [it was caused by a conflict between the change in the capacitance due to the rotating liquid crystal altering the cells dielectric constant, verses the static capacitance of the glass cell acting as a ‘fixed’ reactive capacitor. something a 3rd year physicist should have suspected]. After the allotted weeks, the students presented their results, and I with a member of academic staff would mark their efforts.
Then the surprise, the Greek student, who was adept at programming, had used a computer to analyse the oscilloscope output, and automatically provide the calculated results. Alas the program could only handle ‘well-behaved’ graphical output, and so the students opted to ignore the ‘anomalous bumps’ of the real data.
I felt I was being overly generous to award them 70%, and rather dominated the member of staff [I was a mature student], who wanted to award more points! Further, when word got around that the ‘wonder’ student had only gotten a ‘mere first’ from some lowly Poly oik of a lab demonstrator, it rather split the department regarding my credibility. And it became knowledge to another PhD student, who was himself an undergraduate from Manchester University, who recognised his computer program had been used by the Greek student without citing the true author. But it was too late for me, I had offended the status quo, and after the Greek student complained to the head of the department [to his credit, the star student took it on the chin], the students were given more points, and I was put on probation.
That was just one of many eye openers as to the decay of academic standards in what used to be an exemplary physics institute. Another is the fact that 25% of the student intake at Manchester Uni’ got firsts, compared to the Poly where only 4% of the whole science faculty intake got firsts; even less for physicists. Compounded by the lack of external scrutiny regarding exam questions. The Poly had the CNAA to ensure that exam questions were not rigged; whereas the exam questions at the Uni’ were not scrutinized, as a trip to John Rylands library would confirm from looking through past papers, that despite the higher academic standard required to answer the Uni’ papers, they were the same questions year in, year out. Therefore any moderately competent student could get a first by simply having a good memory.
It’s an ongoing cultural decay, and not only limited to the UK:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoTGFCmKxRc&feature=fvsr
It’s the deadly combination of ‘scientific conceit’ coupled with lax criticism brought about by namby-pamby moral relativism, that is resulting in a Dunning-Kruger type skills inversion, with the credibility of science drowning in the rise of the parvenues.
He was persecuted… of course, and how do we know this – because he says it to be true.
Sourcewatch are persecuting him by pointing out that he is chairman of NRSP and a previous advisor for “friends of science” (a name which positively screams of newspeak), both organisations heavily linked to the oil industry. TBH, as cases of persecution go, I don’t think this is up there with the worst of them.
Does ‘persecution’ explain the incredible opacity of his own c.v. which shows the last 15 years of his career simply as “Environmentalist, Public Speaker, Consultant, Author, columnist.” while his 2 years of military service from 50 years ago is more detailed?
Back to science (for those who are “time poor”) – from 30min on in the Cloud Mystery (link above) Nir Shaviv (astrophysicist) and Svensmark direcly address the relevance of the Milky Way and our Solar systems position within it to our climate.
Clark; Interesting you were ‘in the Truth’. How long? Me; 7 years.
I just couldn’t get past the fossil record.
Sufyan Ben Qumu
The script writers, psychologist, and anthropologists gathered in a backroom and given their task: reappraise the enemy.
As any school kid knows “Q” is a scary, sinister, and dangerous letter, as in the bond movies Q is a trouble maker. Added to the scary bit is the Pavlovian “bin” and the finishing touches are the Sufyan, this latter bit indicates a Turkic connection, but hey Arab, Turks, what matters they are Muslims, aren’t they?
Now that we have the villain object all we need to do is to find the methods for this villain to conduct his “Jihad”. This means the story of the day embellished and the villain injected in to it.
Well that is how these bastards ride around in their big cars and enjoy no questions asked company credit cards.
However, those of us whom value mundane and old fashioned concepts like dignity, humanity, and conscience would rather ride on the buses, keeping expenses to a minimum to meet the rent and energy bills, but to be proud; these never sold out.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2206105/White-House-admits-attack-Libya-killed-ambassador-Chris-Stevens-act-terror.html?openGraphAuthor=%2Fhome%2Fsearch.html%3Fs%3D%26authornamef%3DMichael%2BZennie
Obama can’t have it both ways. Qumu’s detention was the linchpin. No, it wasn’t the films fault, in a vacuum, but are there really any vacuums? The film was a tool, but the trigger is the due-process genie-in-a-bottle released, and it will be hard to put it back in. The Sorcerer’s apprentice has lost control of the wand, and the brooms multiply exponentially.
Hi Scouse Billy
You no understand (in Italian accent), Earth is an independent eco system that is unlike any other place in the whole damn universe.
Now let me educate you;
Life is found only on Earth, as well as water, and seeing as we human beings were created in the image of God and God has been making everything in six days that lasted 900 years for Adam to live to populate the place with his seed, that means the lot of the incestuous bastards keeping the banking and other lucrative scams in the family and not letting any of the other distant cousins to have look in.
Now do you understand?
Best learn properly because soon you will have to sit a stringent written test, as per M. Gove new polices.
This filter thing must hate me, or love me, which I cannot fathom out? It keeps grabbing my comments and rudely telling me;”Your comment is awaiting moderation.” and to add insult to injury in bold too. Oh the humanity of it all, oh the calumny, oh the ……
Anyone who has any doubts about the IPCC being a political rather than scientific organisation should read The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert by Donna Laframboise. The IPCC is about as trustworthy as its namesake…
This book details the make up and workings of the IPCC. It is fully referenced and brings together many threads you may read about elsewhere, sometimes even in the MSM. Gosh. Such is the documentary evidence, it seems beyond rebuttal.
The Anthony Watts smear in a comment above is breathtaking. The work he has done (genuine scientific enquiry) puts some of the warmist scientists to shame.
Another book worth reading is The Hockey Stick Illusion. Again, fully referenced and quite damning. The creator of the Hockey Stick (Michael Mann) does not like to discuss the contents of this book, because he has no answer to it.
I recall Craig previously saying he believed in man-made global warming. I for one given credence to Craig’s comments about the FCO and the shenanigans of government, compared to those I read in the MSM. But not global warming. Craig and many readers here will have taken views about climate change from the media and establishment sources. They are not always to be trusted! You know this or wouldn’t be here! Seek out dissidents (like Craig is r.e. government) from the scientific community and you will start to see a more credible picture of what is really going on. BTW anything written by George Monbiot (who can by OK on other subjects) is almost always bonkers.
I speak as someone scientifically trained who accepted the theory until I started thinking hard about it myself.
What is the crux of the disagreement? Humans, like all life are carbon-based. What have we contributed to the ecosystem? Plastic? Cow farts, and cyclic natural phenomenon may be the lion’s share of warming, but can anyone suggest we don’t contribute?
Still on the science thing. Anyone who rates people by their qualifications is deluded. I have met quite a few PhDs who are seriously deficient in the thinking department. This goes for Professors too. Appeals to authority don’t work in science. Well, they do but shouldn’t.
Fucking hell the bottom has fallen off even the crime business now:
Warning issued over plans to close 11 sheriff courts in Scotland
A PROPOSAL to close 11 sheriff courts across Scotland threatens access to justice, the Law Society of Scotland has warned.
The Scottish Courts Service (SCS) has begun a three-month consultation, outlining its plan to shut sheriff courts in Dornoch, Duns, Kirkcudbright, Peebles, Rothesay, Alloa, Cupar, Dingwall, Arbroath, Haddington and Stonehaven.
However in line with the mandated optimism by Lord Young the economic advisor to PM, one could also put a positive spin on this as;
Enterprise and equal opportunity taken care of, now lets move onto how to Freedom the heck out of some place or other overseas.
What will those secular bastards taking the piss out of the outraged Muslims: say, when they read this.
A senior member of the Royal College of General Practitioners is under investigation after telling medical students that they should act in a less “overtly gay” fashion in order to pass their exams.
According to the Independent, the inquiry was launched following the discovery that Dr Una Coales had written a controversial guide setting out ways in which minority candidates could “neutralise bias” from examiners when trying to pass the Royal College’s Clinical Skills Assessment.
J, thank you for raising an important point – here of all places, there is such an acceptance by some including our host of MSM establishment dogma wrt AGW.
I just read a great quotation from a fellow “slayer” (as I consider myself):
“The “typology” for this Faux debate is obvious….there are three sides, Warmists, Luke Warmists and Slayers….and two sides are wrong. There is NO emperical evidence that the “atmospherics” of GHE exist anywhere beyond climate insiders computer models. Complex science is not easily reducable to the intentionally reduced layman level of understanding. Bullet point rebuttals become useless and therefore require reference to other supporting research. CO2 does not “capture” or redirect IR energy. The absorption process lasts a billionth of a second. The momentary kinetic energy boost is followed by a lower energy, longer wave emission that is invisible to additional CO2 absorption. This kinetic energy is then distributed to adjoining N2 and O2 molecuels in 4 billionths of a second, creating an upward convective current. Any downward directed emission would have less energy, and NO ability to warm the still warmer Earth.
Everything about AGW is absurd, requiring cherry picked data and statistical manipulation, as Montford documents in his excellent book “The Hockey Stick Illusion”. But this is not the only illusion, as much of modern science is a fraud. Read more about this in “Becoming A TOTAL Earth Skeptic”.
“It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled”….Mark Twain
We have been fooled for a reason, read “Fractional Reserve Banking Begat Faux Reality” to see the real reason for climate alarmism…and supporting branches of Faux Science.”
Amen to that especially the Mark Twain quotation.
Question for J
I really want out of this ridiculous nonsense now, but I feel compelled to ask a quick question first.
Anyway, J – at first you wrote:
17 minutes later you wrote:
Well, in those intervening 17 minutes I was reading a little about Ms Laframboise’s book, and to sum up, it seems the titular complaint was that someone without a PhD wrote a report for the IPCC. She also quoted to Fox news in discussion of the very book you are promoting:
Can you see the contradiction here between your two posts, and which one should we ignore?
Geoff, it is the hypocrisy of the IPCC that states that its reports are prepared by the world’s best accredited peer reviewed scientific experts.
LaFramboise investigated their claim – that is the point.
J, is not contradicting his own perfectly correct view.
Scousebilly,
I will do something you have so far refused to do, and that is to respond to a post aimed at me.
Can you point me to a link where the IPCC have made the statement you attribute to them? And by that, I mean a quote directly from them, not a link to a third party attribution.
Should you be able to do so, I will judge them on that basis. Should you be unable to do so, I will put as little store in this allegation as I have in others I have read previously.
STATEMENT OF DR. R. K. PACHAURI
Chairman, IPCC
Director General, The Energy and Resources Institute
Director, Yale Climate and Energy Institute
Excellencies, members of the media, distinguished ladies and gentlemen! I speak to you in the voice of the world’s scientific community, which in November 2007 completed IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (AR4), the collective effort of almost four thousand of the world’s best specialists working tirelessly over five years…
http://www.un.org/wcm/webdav/site/climatechange/shared/Documents/SpeechPachauri.pdf
Scouse billy, the large time required to turn any global system, not that we yet can do such a thing, would make it crucial to act.
Lets face it, we cannot stop methane releases, we have not attempted it or could possibly stop them. No we instead are just about to drill and probe the North Atlantic/Artic floor with more oil wells, whilst methane releases happen all the time, but there are vast stores of it and if they would be released in a large amount, due to a particularly chaotic year, where temperatures sore and more methane gets released, then we will have a runaway situation, with rising temperatures galore.
Should we act to stop this ecological supertanker and begin to feed in some new, more sustainable coordinates, or shall we go full steam ahead, gosh, that makes me think of Dr. Strangelove waving his hat madly as he descends.
Nevermind, it is a manufactured “crisis” – there is no empirical evidence for the radiative (greenhouse effect) model whatsoever.
I do think there are real issues of poverty, pollution, and disease that need to be addressed but are if anything exacerbated by the “solutions” to this fake “problem” aside from the billions wasted on fake science that could and should be put to better use.
Got totally bogged down in the al Hilli thread. Just surfacing for air.
If you haven’t been there lately, you should check it out as a fine example of diversion, derailing and dissembling. One does wonder why?
Meanwhile, London Met..
London Metropolitan University wins reprieve in student visa row
Judges rules more than 1,000 overseas students can start courses while LMU challenges suspension of licence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/sep/21/london-metropolitan-university-reprieve-student-visa
Hmmm. Human activity. What could go wrong? “Drill, baby, drill”
http://voices.yahoo.com/methane-gas-explosion-gulf-could-kill-millions-6323176.html
Chris Jones 19 Sep, 2012 – 5:04 pm
“30,000 recognised scientists have signed a petition denouncing the exagerated claims of man made global warming.”
http://www.petitionproject.org
Chris,
I do not have the knowledge to understand the science and must assess the opinions/credentials/motivations of those who do to make a judgement.
I was genuinely interested in your impressive claim. Thanks for the link. I took a look at the site.
First Impressions
I have looked at a lot of web sites and my immediate intuitive reaction to this one was BEWARE. It has the look of a site trying to sell a miracle cure for headaches. It looked like the work of a marketeer rather than a scientific study. You know, patterned background, big red lettering.
The home page says “31,487 American scientists have signed this petition”. American? Why only invite Americans to sign? Yet again not proof of anything but possibly an indicator of the myopic nature of this project.
The “Qualifications of Signers” page explains “Signatories are approved for inclusion in the Petition Project list if they have obtained formal educational degrees at the level of Bachelor of Science or higher in appropriate scientific fields.” They are “approved for inclusion”, they have obtained “formal” degrees. Now that is the language of marketeers, repeatedly reinforces great authority where in fact there is little.
In fact even the project acknowledges the signatories merely have a science related degree. We shall look at the veracity of that claim in a minute but even taken at face value, so what? A degree is absolutely no indicator of an inquiring mind. Really none. I have met so many people with degrees who are idiots and even corruptible.
So, my first impressions were not favourable. My internal alarm bells were singing. But hey that’s only my impression. So let’s look further.
The People Behind The Project
The project web site is registered to Arthur Robinson. Art is currently running for congress. He is for smaller government, less business regulation, reduced taxation, large miltary, private medical care, NRA. He opposes any welfare except charity.
Now that list should have all our alarm bells ringing. He is, at the very least, in thrall of big business.
Now can I see a reason for such a man to create a climate change denial project (if indeed this is what he has done)? You bet I can. Let me spell out my doubting logic. Big business deny climate change because acknowledgement would interrupt their profits. Art is their man and a scientist. He would be the perfect stooge for a denial propaganda exercise.
http://petitionproject.org.whoisbucket.com
http://www.artforcongress.com
Dr. Frederick Seitz is the scientist who compiled the arguments forwarded by the project. Seitz earned over half a million dollars lobbying for the tobacco industry. So a man who will clearly sell his soul.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Frederick_Seitz
The homepage displays the signature of Edward Teller. Teller helped develop the hydrogen bomb and worked on Reagan’s star wars project. He was an active anti communist.
http://www.answers.com/topic/edward-teller
The Signatories
The signatories is merely a list of names. Nothing else at all. No other information about the signatories is provided. I simply googled a random selection. Here is the results for everyone that I searched for (I was not selective).
David F Larochelle, MD
I saw only 3 types of results for this name. One for his web site. Another for his entry on the project. The rest where for meaningless corporate listing sites which are meaningless and often used for data manipulation.
His own web site, claiming he is a orthopdeic surgeon, has 8 pages. All the pages are empty except the home page which has contact details and an apology that the site is still under construction. However, the web site was put up in 2006. A quick search on the address shows it is actually occupied by North Bay Paediactrics with no DR Larochelle working there.
So, one possibly real, but possibly not real, orthopdeic surgeon.
http://www.dlarochellemd.com
http://whois.domaintools.com/dlarochellemd.com
http://www.northbaypediatrics.com/contactus.html
Harry H. Kishineff
Absolutely nothing except for his reference in the project’s list.
Everett Williams Jameson Jr., Phd
Jameson was a zoologist who wrote books about falconary and mammal evolution. He died in 2010.
Betty W. Kjellstrom, DVM
Kjellstrom practised as a vet but her licence expired in 2009.
Daniel Tao, Ph.D
A professor at the Department of Mining Engineering, University of Kentucky.
H. William Leech, PhD
Inconclusive but possibly a mechanical engineer in the nuclear industry. Leech died in May.
Deanna K Belanger
Absolutely nothing
Wayne Reynolds Faircloth, PhD
Faircloth was a biologist/botanist who died in 2008.
Alvin R. Flesher
Flesher was a mechanical engineer, model builder and badmington enthusiast who dies in 2007.
Lawrence Harding Johnston, PhD
Johnston has a B.A. in Foreign Languages. He is a partner in McConkey-Johnston International who claim to be “the best general consulting firm in the Christian marketplace”.
http://www.mcconkey-johnston.com
Not a comprehensive analysis but I bet it’s more than you have done. So none of the above seem to be anything more than mediocre in their fields. And most of their fields give them little more insight into very complex specialist science than an informed hairdresser. With a few possible exceptions, but even these have a vested interest (mining, nuclear).
Certainly this tiny cross section instills no faith that the list comprises a weight of expertise.
But it takes no skill to do such research. If you still have faith in this list then why not research a few names yourself. But don’t be picky!
My Conclusion
The site is organised by people who are obvious propagandists for the corporate world. The list, by my small analysis, is made up of no experts, people who know nothing about the subject and others who might or might not exist.
What a load of shit it is.
PIcking up on this point about consequences for the poor in underdeveloped countries, the warming lobby and perhaps well-meaning supporters have in the last decade swooped on third world nations including their hosted environmental conferences and in effect told the undeveloped world that it cannot have even the most basic sources of power that we all take for granted. In particular they have been told to feel guilty about having a meaningful electricity supply, meaningful being coal, gas, hydro or nuclear power, because solar and wind technology in their current states are woefully inadequate and extremely expensive.
So while the developed countries are being asked to restrict their power usage by a small amount, the third world has been asked not to have conventional power at all. In effect this means the warmist lobby and green activist want to deny developing and already desperately poor rural communities in those countries from having any electricity. This kind of arrogance and complete naivity would soon be dispelled if the same activists were to live in a poor tribal village for just three days.
In those three days they will learn what it is like to cook over a fire and breath in sulpher and carbon MON-oxide, or go to a local doctor’s surgery where there is barely enough power to run a refrigerator to keep medicines and drugs cool and therefore usable, or to preserve many foods for more than a day, or to have any light to see by after sunset.
This naivity comes from a ludicrous romanticisation of tribal village life. And all this for the sake of a common gas (CO2) which is just one tiny part of a host of other possible reasons for a small rise in global temperature.
Meanwhile, other really serious and proven pollutants have dropped off the warmists’ agenda, so obsessed are they by CO2. Of course you cannot trade in other pollutant “offsets” so the bigwigs of the environmnental lobby want to keep everyone focussed on CO2 trading, from which many of them have reaped vast rewards in addition to tax payer subsidised investment in new technologies (wind, solar and others) none of which have made any viable contribution to energy problems because of their vast expense and relative inefficiency.
It is true that nations like China are major polluters and that is because their techniques of burning of coal is still in the dark ages. Western coal burning industries have never been cleaner and there are huge reserves of coal. Meanwhile the switch to bio-fuels has decimated food provision in the third world but in fact bio fuels ironically produce more CO2 than conventional fuels.
Billy: thanks for stepping in, you saved me the bother. I try to avoid getting bogged down in global warming arguments on the internet these days as it gets tiresome very quickly. Hence my reference to a couple of books which, if people actually read them, can’t help but make them feel uneasy about the line they have been fed for years. The tide is turning anyway. I’m loathe to make predictions, but I’m certain global warming will be used as an example of what goes wrong when science and politics get mixed up. People on the left say AGW is happening so it must be true. And the reverse. Bollocks to both. Many a PhD study and book will be created on it and some names, familiar to a few here, will live on in infamy.
Due to my work & background I associate with a lot of scientifically minded people. Once they have started looking into things and thought things through critically, none of them believes in the scare stories anymore. But hey, don’t believe me, I’m just some guy on the internet.