Would you care to be more explicit…......or just call me a liar and run away like a coward?
Haven’t decided. As for the lies, when you claim ALL climate models predict such and such (which you characterized as far less worse than is the case) you are either lying or too stupid to realize what you have said. I’d prefer to give you credit for brains and Bush is just stupid. Now I’ll tell you a little secret. I have been involved with a meta analysis of five of the seven major climate models (you look em up, I’m not paid to educate you). I am intimately familiar with the “uncertainty” that you make such a big deal out of - to convince people the models are wrong I suppose. You have consistently mischaracterized this work and I’m simply tired of trying to point this out.
And the best you came up with is Bjorn Lomborg. Give us all a break will you.
No cowardice here. Just plain sick and tired of your bullshit. I’m not wasting any more time since, as I pointed out, the rest of the non-ideological world is recognizing the problem and starting to do something about it. Me convincing you is a non-starter.
To my knowledge, nothing that I have stated is untrue.
Well maybe thats your problem. You can’t tell truth from fiction.
Please back up your claim…......... or forego all credibility.
Do you seriously think I care if I’m credible to you. Surprise, surprise, I have a rather successful career that doesn’t depend on your opinion one way or another. Maybe you should consider your own credibility with the professionals. Thats the last character I waste on your sorry ass.
WOOHOOOO…...!!! what a zinger guest#2!!! No wonder CA hasn’t responded!!!
Thought I’d pop in to see what was going on and found this tirade. Geez you guys.
Since Lomborg was brought up, and I read enough of his book to realize what his bias was, I thought I’d share a review done in Grist. You can see what some very respected scientists and policy analysts have to say about Mr. Lomborg’s ideas. BTW. He is not a scientist himself, but a poly sci. type with a reasonable background in statistics, which he uses deftly but starting from erroneous assumptions and selective data. See for yourselves.
I think someone else has pointed out that Lindzen, who is a scientist, has failed to produce any science that bolsters his claims and basis for skepticism.
[quote author=“Anonymous”]WOOHOOOO…...!!! what a zinger guest#2!!! No wonder CA hasn’t responded!!!
If you track back over his correspondences on this topic you will see he has never really responded to anything. He is an idealogue from the get go. And an arrogant one at that - as if only conservatives have brains. What an assh**e.
My apologies to everyone else (except maybe TChamp) for getting so hot headed. I’ve been dealing with this kind of obsfucation from the bush administration for several years now and frankly my patience is worn out. I provided lots of links and references in another thread - A Real Armagedon - so for those of you who are willing to do the reading you will find plenty of science background on this topic. And then make up your own minds. But since the G8 (minus the US) is pressing for stronger CO2 reductions (even than Kyoto) it is clear that there simply is no longer a credible question as to whether global warming is happening. The only questions now is how will climate change affect specific regions and the models are getting better at postdicting the past 20 years every day!