Nick Anderson for December 08, 2009

I wonder if the guy who drew this toon has read the emails.

I just want to know why nobody seems to remember thirty years ago when there was a big panic over global cooling from the same causes. There is no doubt that we should take better care of our planet but phonies like Al Gore, Michael Moore and our foreigner president give the whole thing a political black eye with their own carbon footprint.

Another well done ‘toon Mr Anderson. Thank you

Nick, nice take on systematic falsification and corruption of scientific data.

^I believe the phrase you’re looking for is don’t sh*t where you eat.

The train is indeed at the end of the tunnel. Years in search and rescue in both hot and cold climates is a real teaching aid in just how narrow a range humans can occupy, and survive- granted that ignorance and stupidity don’t help.

That the Roman Catholic church fought science for centuries, yet today has it’s own folks working in the sciences might educate some- it’s a glimmer that all things need not still be based solely on superstition and mythology?

What offends so many about science is the simple facts it’s based on logic and proofs- alien objectives to those who actually want to spread fear.

It’s amazing to me how people are criticizing scientists for being real, human beings. Scientists never wanted to be treated as gods. alcors3, no one is forgetting it. One of the many pieces of evidence that supports global warming is that due to current orbital status, the Earth should be cooling and entering another ice age. It isn’t, but the orbit hasn’t changed. So what has? One guess. We know more than we did thirty years ago. Good Lord, did you think that everyone in the environmental and atmospheric sciences have been sitting on their thumbs the last thirty years?

ahab - Levi is awesome as you have discovered

your heart will swell with human compassion and a sweet renewal of passion and gratitude for life when you read *Survival in Auschwitz”

the man is an anomaly in the brood of writers about survival - without self-pity - and he’s a poet of the gifted caliber

oh canuck - such a benighted statement

Belief cannot co-exist with science or philosophy. They fear anything that might lead them to question their own beliefs

If when you say belief you are talking about faith in Creator-God you are obviously blinded by a hard-right, managerial-complex, knee-jerk stubborness to stick with your platitudes without doing research beyond a few like-minded denial mongers who are your friends

where do you think science and philosophy began anyway? If anything, the complexity of intelligence, the mind and human behavior prove the greatness of the Creator

any grandios big bang theory has a hole in it the size and shape of truth

For a very highly scientific and somewhat long review of the position of a respected skeptic look at the following. The problem I see with the AGW advocates is one their strongest arguments is the lack of peer reviewed opposition. But the emails revealed that there was a concerted effort to deny any of those who were in opposition that ability to publish.

http://volokh.com/2009/12/08/the-homogenized-data-is-false/

c’mon human

when did peer review ever prove truth?

canook of the north

-I am morally opposed to belief and shall destroy it wherever I find it. But I am a strong supporter of faith-

this statement, for some bizarre reason, does not make any earthly sense to me

again you play this semantic sudoku as a foil to discourse

cannot dissuade your clutch on denial, but can vehemently disagree with you

further,

my statement If when you say belief you are talking about faith in Creator-God

does not ask for word-play but strives to clarify your thought for me

if you want a good argument, give me something more substantive

and why in the name of all that’s sacred to some of us would you want to destroy belief

Good thing we have all the naysayers to teach us the real science!!

pointed response human - not bad - until you got to the f-ing f-words

canuck - easy for you to say but plain ain’t in ya

it’s kinda bunky the believe that and the believe in thing. we really should discuss it

whoa i’m just too sleepy

night

nothing wong with sudoku sr - you know what i mean

and good freakin grief canuck you obfuscated with sophistry again -

believe that vs believe in

it’s irrelevant of course

did i say we really should discuss it

wrong

(Eep! I’m going to revisit my frequent use of “I believe” as a literary expression. Ahem, while this discourse is interesting, I sense things heating up a tad. Blasted Global Warming.)