Scientists not Warming to Global Warming

I have written a number of times about the many scientists in the world who do not agree with the idea of man-made global warming. These scientists are ignored and abused by the GW community in order to minimize their message, a message that says; “We do not agree with the conclusions presented by the UN and its scientists.” These scientists also believe that the reason for all the attention to GW is for people to get rich from it. This is not surprising since AL Gore is getting wealthier by the day while touting GW and selling carbon offsets. Interestingly, those attending the meeting in Bali generated more carbon that 20,000 cars in a year. I have been taken to task in the past by people who say there are not as many scientists against GW as there are for it. this, of course, is hogwash. The same people will tell me that the only scientists who disagree are paid by Exxon or some other petroleum company. I have maintained that many scientists who once believed in GW have changed their opinions after doing real research and that many of those who believe in GW are actually the ones being paid to do so. It would appear that a few scientists agree with me:

“Most of the people here have jobs that are very well paid and they depend on the idea that carbon emissions cause global warming. They are not going to be very receptive to the idea that well actually the science has gone off in a different direction,” Evans explained. EPW.Senate

The article is full of scientists who do not agree with the GW crowd and have presented scientific evidence to refute the GW community. Unfortunately, these scientists are ignored or castigated because they refuse to jump on the bandwagon and follow the Pied Piper into the abyss.

Take the time to read the linked article and read the references linked in it. I might be a denier in the eyes of the less informed but at least I am in good company.

Big Dog



Print This Post

If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.

4 Responses to “Scientists not Warming to Global Warming”

  1. Scott says:

    GW or not as “Conservatives” people should be for reducing the impact of humanity upon the environment, its that whole conserve part of Conservative. Reducing or eliminating pollution from industry and transportation gives us cleaner air to breathe, cleaner water to drink, and helps our overall health. Its just good practice whether or not it has anything to do with GW.

    Just like developing alternative fuels to petroleum is a good idea, for strategic reasons and economic reasons. Washington and the people of the US were shown just what an impact dependence on foreign oil could do to us and our economy in the 1970’s yet we’ve done nothing to remedy that situation in nearly 40 years. I remember the gas lines of the 70’s how can those in Washington not? Eventually we’ll use up the planets petroleum reserves and by developing other renewable fuels and energy sources we’ll be able to stretch those reserves much further until we have no need of them because we’ve come up with renewable alternatives.

    Also some of the biggest reserves of crude oil are in Muslim nations, and the west seems on a collision course with Islamic Extremism as the moderate Muslim seems to be as elusive as Bigfoot & the Loch Ness Monster. If the Middle Eastern nations formed a union and cut off sales of crude oil to the US and our allies they could put us into a depression and maybe even cripple our military since military vehicles aren’t known for fuel efficiency. Petroleum is a vital resource to the US, we’ve already seen how the higher gas prices have affected our economy with inflation, and we need to get off the oil teat and find a cheap renewable source of energy for us to use.

  2. Big Dog says:

    While I agree that we need to develop alternatives to oil I also believe that we should use oil for our fuel. We have it and if we were allowed to drill for our own we would decrease our dependence.

    This is a double edged sword. We want energy independence but our country refuses to build nuclear power plants. There are problems with nuclear waste but all fuels will have some waste. Developing one that is renewable for the sake of having it does no good if it is not efficient. Ethanol requires more energy to produce than it provides but corn is plentiful so we go with it.

    We need efficient fuels.

    As for GW, I cannot see how spending a fortune on something we cannot control and that happens in cycles and has for millions of years, will help us. Control pollution, cleaner renewable fuels, sure but get GW out of the equation.

  3. Adam says:

    I agree with Scott. I hope it’s mainly skepticism and myth about GW, but I believe in doing whatever you can to lower your negative impact on the environment. We must be good stewards of the Earth and protect it for our future generations.

    New research is showing that alternative energy sciences will boost our economy and add jobs if we do it right. There is a vein of dishonestly in the idea that it will cost us a fortune to make changes. Sure, it will cost a lot, but It will certainly cost us more in the long run if we don’t start now. It would be fitting to our national character and would certainly make me very proud of this country if we were to take the lead in alternative energy much as we took the lead in the space race.

    I think the challenges presented by the mass usage of nuclear energy are just as great if not greater than those challenges presented by the usage of solar and wind energies, so why shouldn’t we spend more money on developing these technologies instead of putting nuclear facilities all over?

  4. […] it doesn’t make for good “doom and gloom” headlines, does it? From the blogs: One Big Dog, Say Anything, OpenMarket, D=S, Wake Up America, […]