February 12, 2007

More Global Warming Scuttlebutt

You may recall back here where I noted how preposterous a comparison of global warming skepticism to Holocaust denial would be; now, a popular syndicated columnist (occasionally carried by the News Journal) has jumped onboard: Ellen Goodman. She writes

I would like to say we're at a point where global warming is impossible to deny. Let's just say that global warming deniers are now on a par with Holocaust deniers, though one denies the past and the other denies the present and future.

How does one "deny the future" -- considering it hasn't even happened yet??

Elsewhere, environmentalists are lamenting the transport of flowers -- as in Valentine's Day flowers -- due to the CO2 emissions from the jets needed to fly the cargo:

"Air freighting flowers half way round the world contributes to global warming. You can argue the planes would be flying anyway but the amount of greenhouse gases pumped out depends on the weight of the cargo," said Andrew Sims, the policy director of the New Economics Foundation.

Of course, the private transport of those needed cogs in the economic pie, Hollywood movie stars, rarely, if ever, gets a mention in mainstream news outlets, save for some criticism of right-leaning outlets which point out that fact!

Further still, the president of the Czech Republic called out Al Gore on his climate alarmism:

Global warming is a false myth and every serious person and scientist says so. It is not fair to refer to the U.N. panel. IPCC is not a scientific institution: it's a political body, a sort of non-government organization of green flavor. It's neither a forum of neutral scientists nor a balanced group of scientists. These people are politicized scientists who arrive there with a one-sided opinion and a one-sided assignment.

Lastly, a letter writer to the (Wilmington, DE) News Journal -- a PhD in climatology -- writes to defend Delaware State Climatologist David Legates:

I came to the University of Delaware Geography Department to pursue a Ph.D. in climatology, after completing my master's degree in environmental science at Johns Hopkins. Throughout my years at both institutions climatologists and climate researchers have always been skeptical about alarmist data regarding global climate change. Why quote the worst-case scenarios when much more accurate models are more probable?

Climate can change by a few degrees and not indicate catastrophic change -- and it has many times in the past. Carbon dioxide has been in larger atmospheric concentrations than the present with cooler estimated temperatures.

The public must remember that human-induced climate change is still scientifically unproved. The data is inconclusive and must be scrutinized. I'm proud to attend a university with faculty brave enough to challenge the alarmist data and get to the truth.

Ah, but you see, this will never satisfy the Ellen Goodmans, or even the daughters of supposedly misquoted astrophysicists who seem to believe that global warming skeptics are all tied to Big Oil, but scientists who believe said warming will bring about the Book of Revelation are merely noble creatures concerned about their fellow man.

(h/t to NewsBusters for 2nd and 3rd instances above.)

Posted by Hube at February 12, 2007 07:20 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)