|
I did not read the UN report, I wasn't aware of it until I read the editorial. I only brought it up because I dislike the UN and many posters here who believe the globe is warming likes the UN. I agree it is not wise to start a global warming debate, and I admit that I don't have a handle on the issue on way or the other. I was not trying to make a point about global warming, but it seems that if there is a study or evidence that supports global warming in general and secondarily points to the US as the major contributor, it is recieved with acceptance often without question. On the otherhand if one of those studies is questioned or if there is a study that does not support global warming it is received as political, false or simply dismissed.
Regarding Waxman, it seems to me his position is more about being anti-Exxon Mobil than it was about the sceintific issue in question. If a scientist questions the results of another scientist, the scientific community should resolve the dispute, who cares who provided who funding? Well it does matter if you want to score political points against the most profitable company in the world. So, I see Waxman as politicizing the issue.
Thank you for providing the links, they were informative.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."
|