Quote:
|
Originally Posted by raveneye
This is another favorite tactic of global warming denialists. They reference distinguish scientists in a context that implies that those scientists themselves have serious doubts about global warming, when the truth is quite the reverse.
Dawkins for instance would consider anybody who uses his books to cast doubt on global warming as kooks or in the pocket of oil companies, or both.
|
Oh I was sure Dawkins was a global warming guy, I never claimed he didn't support it in the least, but I do respect his evolutionary biology work. Dawkins is as bad as anyone on the political side and I tend to glance at those as he will use out of context quotes or even bogus ones of GW as supporting his position on religion. It is the current book I"m reading on the subject of evolution. The nice thing about something that happened 100 million years ago is that people forget their politics when talking.
Honestly I'm the only scientist HERE in this thread, but I like to try to get people to think a bit differently than what they are spoon fed. Instead one person attacks Dawkins as a hack the other tries to claim I'm using his name to make me look better, and a third I'm not sure what is talking about.
Tecoyah the global cooling scare (and the temperatures DID go down) was in the late 70's by the early 80's thats when the scientific community started to talk about global warming. Those are the 5 years I'm talking about. I'm not denying there might be a warming trend, I do not think its human caused though. This does not put me in a
fringe unless you are talking about whats in the media. I'd put any member of this fringe vrs anyone else in a debate about the science behind human caused global warming. Its not enough to show its happening, you must show we are a the problem.
If you can find me a global warming model that would explain the past climates I might take notice, but they can't show the last 100 years which are well documented, how the hell do you expect anyone with a clue to believe they can do the next 100 years? Hell they don't even agree with each other, but since they all show 'warming' they are all equally bad right? Garbage in garbage out.
Oh and Dave, what are you begging to differ on? Your thoughts, as you just cut and pasted an article I am already familiar with (the information not the source) and the second article didn't say anything.
I want you three to take a look at this diagram.
In light of davids first quote, what does this tell you?