Quote:
|
First of all, the one degree Fahrenheit rise coincided with the greatest advancement of living standards, life expectancy, food production and human health in the history of our planet. So it is hard to argue that the global warming we experienced in the 20th century was somehow negative or part of a catastrophic trend.
|
This is completely cherry picking the original argument - I acknowledge that.
But anyone that throws an "argument" like that into a speech is less than credible to me. Is he suggesting that because we got great benefits during the time the temperature went up, that there can't be negative consequences? I'm no debating whizz, but he's drawing conclusions that are impossible.
The USA today article is interesting as well. He's drawing the worst possible conclusions from the article. While he's arguing that the media (and others) are painting the worst possible scenario with their facts. Hypocrisy doesn't build much confidence.
And I'd love to see the documentation that environmental groups give more money than the fossil fuel industry to politicians. I suspect that's a carefully constructed statistic.
My point: if you're calling BS on others credibility, you should be pretty flawless yourself... and I don't see it.