Comments on: WSJ Hit Piece on Gore Movie Relies on Grievously Flawed Study

By: Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls

Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls — Mon, 14 Apr 2008 01:21:36 +0000

Distance Learning Teachers Having Sex With Students Very Hot School Girls

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

By: Jack

Jack — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 12:07:03 +0000

Jack

Please visit http://www.ncaaedge.info [url=http://www.ncaaedge.info]AWESOME place to go[/url] http://ncaaedge.info

By: Ralph

Ralph — Sun, 06 Apr 2008 00:13:03 +0000

Ralph

Good up the good work.

By: co2 laser

co2 laser — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 08:27:43 +0000

co2 laser

Well spoken. I have to research more on this as it is really vital info.

By: Accounting Financial Financial Success

Accounting Financial Financial Success — Mon, 31 Mar 2008 20:01:30 +0000

Accounting Financial Financial Success

I can not agree with you in 100% regarding some thoughts, but you got good point of view

By: Wallace

Wallace — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:20:39 +0000

Wallace

Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.

By: Andrew Buelken

Andrew Buelken — Thu, 01 Mar 2007 19:58:02 +0000

Global warming does exist. That is wonderful news! A warmer world is better for humanity than a cooler world. The amount of warming actually predicted for the next century is not alarming. Man’s contribution to the total global greenhouse effect is .28%. That means that 99.72% is natural. If the U.S. were to sign onto and follow the Kyoto Accords, we would expect a reduction in that total of .0335%. That is less than natural variability and definitely not worth crippling the global economy!

By: Uncertain

Uncertain — Wed, 14 Feb 2007 20:59:22 +0000

If it is truly a problem, then it wouldn’t cost a thing to change it.
(Eg.Having to buy or rent the Inconvenient Truth tells me that it is only a money grabbing thing.) We are still making huge cars and trucks and still buying junk! If we all stop buying into this and start thinking about what really is living than it would all come together. ie. If we just start living a simple life and buy only what we need and believe that there is move value with people in our lives instead of materials then and only then we will survive this so called global warming.

By: Inside the USA » Bienvenue au réchauffement planétaire

Inside the USA » Bienvenue au réchauffement planétaire — Wed, 09 Aug 2006 22:02:37 +0000

[...] La stratégie est la même que dans le cas de la théorie scientifique de l’évolution, insinuer le doute dans l’esprit du peuple américain. Sans doute pour qu’il continue à s’abreuver aux pompes à essence et ne remette pas en cause certaines opérations militaires. [...]

By: SuperFrenchie » Hot, hot, hot!

SuperFrenchie » Hot, hot, hot! — Fri, 04 Aug 2006 12:53:25 +0000

[...] But there sure are some Americans who disagree. And for some reason, theyâ€™re all on the right wing. As if global warming was a political issue. Last month, it was the Wall Street Journal going at it as strongly as if all the scientists had been working for Chirac. Bush also thinks “there is a debate over whether it’s manmade or naturally caused.” [...]

By: The Gay Expat

The Gay Expat — Wed, 26 Jul 2006 11:27:59 +0000

[...] Think Progress: WSJ Piece on Gore Movie Relies On Grievously Flawed Study [...]

By: Random Abyss » Blog Archive » Senator Inhofe: “Gore is Full of Cr*p”

Sat, 22 Jul 2006 21:08:13 +0000

[...] FINALLY! Someone who can tell their butt from a hole in the ground. Needless to say, the left-wing looneys over at Think Progress(trackback) seem to have other ideas. Their article states: Actually, â€œall of the recent scienceâ€ â€” without exception â€” accepts that global warming is real and caused by humans. The IPCC didnâ€™t involve â€œone scientist.â€ It involved thousands of scientists from over 120 countries, including so-called â€œclimate skepticsâ€ and industry representatives. The National Academy of Sciences recently concluded that the one study singled out by Inhofe for criticism, which was authored by Michael Mann, â€œhas subsequently been supported by an array of evidence.â€ [...]

By: Think Progress » Sen. Inhofe: ‘Gore Is Full of Crap,’ ‘All Recent Science…Confirms This Thing Is A Hoax’

Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:30:12 +0000

[...] Actually, “all of the recent science” — without exception — accepts that global warming is real and caused by humans. The IPCC didn’t involve “one scientist.” It involved thousands of scientists from over 120 countries, including so-called “climate skeptics” and industry representatives. The National Academy of Sciences concluded that the one study singled out by Inhofe for criticism, which was authored by Michael Mann, “has subsequently been supported by an array of evidence.â€ [...]

By: Andrew Sullivan is a Bran Muffin at Three Bulls!

Andrew Sullivan is a Bran Muffin at Three Bulls! — Thu, 06 Jul 2006 04:11:11 +0000

[...] Certainly, Our Poopypanted Hero of Blog would have examined Herr Lindzen’s statements for scientific merit, not just that they sounded, er, sound. I mean he would have searched for responses/critiques such as this and this and this. [...]

By: Think Progress » Andrew Sullivan Compares Gore on Global Warming to Cheney’s Reckless Claims About WMD

Wed, 05 Jul 2006 20:21:49 +0000

[...] There is a scientific consensus (not a “small chance”) that global warming is real and driven by humans. Even most skeptics (maybe even Cheney) would acknowledge, if the earth is going to keep getting warmer and warmer, we are in for serious trouble. [...]

By: Stuart Andrews

Stuart Andrews — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:46:43 +0000

Re: #2: “Gore seems to have a lot of enemies again > Bush knows Al really won the election in 2000, so he has to have Gore smeared on everything he does, even on his global warming movie!”

The highly partisan [in favor of Gore] New York Times investigated the Florida Presidential race of 2000 and concluded Bush won. “Global warming” and “Gore won” – 2 fraudulant claims in one blog! Very efficiently done!

By: Stuart Andrews

Stuart Andrews — Wed, 05 Jul 2006 09:27:45 +0000

Since the earth’s temperature fluctuates – just like the business cycle does – there will always be politicians clamoring for credit for the ultimate and predictable corrective course change, when it occurs. “My [legislative] bill caused the sea change and saved the day. Vote for me.”

“Scientists” have discovered – through empirical and reproducible experimentation – that they get more research funding when they predict the sky is falling. Warming advocates cleverly omit weather trends of the middle ages that skew their hockey-stick graph. They rely on erroneous or speculative assumptions for their computer models and then accept the predictions as gospel. They respond to dissent with ad hominem attacks, and try to marginalize the dissenter, no matter his credentials. They forget they, in lock-step consensus, just as histrionically warned of global cooling in the 1970’s, unless “something [drastic - as usual] was done” [by big government, of course] immediately to reverse the trend, which, we now see, apparently reversed itself.

Each citizen must decide if he wants to be taxed to the tune of $4000/yr per family [for starters plus or minus (OK, plus) a factor of 10] to respond to a natural cycle, that – even if manmade – we wouldn’t be able to control anyway. This whole thing is a left-wing power grab. I’m still waiting for global cooling and the population bomb to materalize. Advocates can now explain why cooling didn’t happen after all, but they were unequivocal at the time in their predictions of annihilation. How soon we forget.

By: DaPrez

DaPrez — Sat, 01 Jul 2006 14:06:28 +0000

JJ says in #78
“…Mt. St. Helens did not increase the CO2 levels in the atmosphere by 30%. We have. By burning fossil fuels.”

Oh my goodness, we’ve taken something very, very small and increased it by 30%!!!
That’s amazing!!! Look! CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is still very, very small! (

By: Yuckfouall

Yuckfouall — Fri, 30 Jun 2006 23:23:22 +0000

The WSJ is notoriously biased, but Algore and Think Progress are not.

By: calscientist

calscientist — Thu, 29 Jun 2006 07:36:35 +0000

Peiser attempted to write a letter to Science that was rejected and published elsewhere (Energy and the Environment, vol. 16, p. 685, 2005). Nowhere in his letter does he say what lindzen asserts, that 900+ had no abstracts, a frankly bizarre claim. Peiser makes a rather od claim that his letter was rejected on narrow technical grounds. i suspect it was rejected because it was flawed. A letter by “strong climate change” skeptic Roger Pielke was published and responded to by Oreskes last year. Peiser claims that some 34 question the human role–but he has somehow pulled up about 200 more abstracts than Oreskes with no explanation of the discrepancy given that he claimed to use the same keywords.

Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch have published what is ostensibly a direct survey of climate scientists that reveals majority support for human induced warming but not high consensus. What is not clear is who these climate scientists are-the survey was accessed voluntarily and the geographic distribution changed markedly between their initial 1996 and final 2003 survey. I fail to see that they provided security against potential “ballot box stuffing”. This said, there is a clear shift of responses towards the above statement between 1996 and 2003.

Lindzen’s willingness to post crappy opeds on the notoriously biased WSJ pages undercuts his notable and singular credibility among `skeptics’.