PastaJoe Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 2005 ."If we just look at the historical data, there is a scientific consensus that the global mean temperature has risen modestly during the twentieth century," said Myron Ebell, director of global warming and environmental policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute . "The impacts have been small and probably beneficial in aggregate. This historical data puts the onus of demonstration on those who think this gradual warming trend will accelerate and lead to dire consequences." The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a public interest group dedicated to free enterprise and limited government. http://cei.org/about In other words, we'll say whatever it takes to make sure nobody threatens the profits of our supporters, regardless of the facts. Just like Pat Buchanan, who last night said that it should be every country for itself when it comes to the environment. I guess some people think that like immigration, you can close the border when it comes to the environment and it will solve all the problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 How long ago was that? Thirty years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 In other words, we'll say whatever it takes to make sure nobody threatens the profits of our supporters, regardless of the facts. You mean, just like everyone else opining on the subject? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 The Competitive Enterprise Institute is a public interest group dedicated to free enterprise and limited government. http://cei.org/about In other words, we'll say whatever it takes to make sure nobody threatens the profits of our supporters, regardless of the facts. Just like Pat Buchanan, who last night said that it should be every country for itself when it comes to the environment. I guess some people think that like immigration, you can close the border when it comes to the environment and it will solve all the problems. I think there are facts being ignored on both sides of the issue. And as for "whatever it takes to make sure nobody threatens the profits of our supporters" isn't that what the green radicals are saying and doing? Al Gore isn't a model of rationality these days. Come to think of it, he never was. Do you know if he sold his shares of Occidental Petroleum yet? I know he's tightened up his house so it only uses about 12 times what an average American house uses. Cheers for old Al - The People's Pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 regardless of the facts. There isn't anything remotely resembling "fact" in regard to Global Warming - which is the biggest reason it was renamed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 19, 2009 Share Posted December 19, 2009 This thing drops way down the prority list IMO but I'm more inclined to doubt Obama will see it that way. I think it's pretty clear that Obama could give one rat'sasshair about what anyone in this country wants or cares about. The goal is simply to increase individual dependence on the government. Period. The opinions of the majority means nothing to him or his administration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary M Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 That's why research is done. Not how. "How" usually involves figuring out what is and is not valid data (which is often a BS procedure that, despite being BS, does not indicate a grand conspiracy to defraud) - and also involves tenure tracks and "publish or perish" pressure. Hence, it tends to be insanely competitive, and frequently biased towards the preconceived notions of whoever's doing the research. And that's really all those emails represent. There's no great conspiracy, just a lot of little social factors that go into research that most people aren't aware of. Note also that I'm not saying it's right, just that it's not a conspiracy. I understand that. I just have trouble with the people who claim the evidence is in and that there is a concensus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 21, 2009 Share Posted December 21, 2009 I understand that. I just have trouble with the people who claim the evidence is in and that there is a concensus. Oh, the evidence is in, and there is a consensus. No doubt. But that doesn't mean ****. The analysis of the evidence is questionable, and "consensus" is a political concept, not a scientific one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts