I’ve been skeptical of climate change because (a) I think Al Gore’s an idiot; (b) the climate changers see everything in terms of climate change, which is nonsensical; (c) the Climate Gate emails indicated fraud and information suppression to advance the climate change narrative, suggesting that the actual facts do not advance that narrative; and (d) the manifest goal of those backing climate change is to transfer wealth from America to other nations and to downgrade the American standard of living. I therefore wholeheartedly believe blogs such as Watts Up With That? when they put up posts challenging the climate change narrative.
The problem for me is that I’m not well-versed in science, and can easily be led down the primrose path. So, while I have practical and ideological reasons for rejecting climate change, I can’t boast that I understand science well enough to add scientific reasons to my skeptical stance.
This gets me to the crux of this post. One of my liberal Facebook friends, writing with a big “A-ha!”, linked to a blog post that claims to prove that climate change skeptics are cherry-picking data and are scientifically ignorant. Since I’ve already admitted to scientific ignorance, I’m as incapable of analyzing this post, with which I disagree on principle, as I am of analyzing the Watts Up With That posts, with which I agree on principle.
So here’s the help I need from you: Do those of you with better scientific chops than I have (that would be just about everyone) have any opinion on the relative merits of the post contending that climate change skeptics are arguing out of their rear orifice?Email This Post To A Friend
33 Responses to “Help wanted to understand a climate change post”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.