Mosher Since virtually all funding for climate science comes from the state, and is thus precommitted to
a finding of alarmism, your recommendation for a fecund scepticism is.....?
Not exact matches
Of course some
alarmism - addicted readers will insist that we ignore these
findings, and blindly accept the alarmist scenarios.
Although the provisions
of Chapter 9 municipal bankruptcy technically shield the city from being forced to sell any asset, a mixture
of alarmism and rational fear
of a populist campaign — to
find revenue wherever possible to pay pensioners and other creditors — has led a wide array
of observers to wonder how much money, exactly, could be squeezed out
of the encyclopedic museum's vast holdings.
I
find it interesting that at that time the projections were for more warming than later iterations
of the IPPC... but the
alarmism during the same period has increased.
I
find it interesting that a particular organization might be indicted for supposedly being funded by the fossil fuel industry when so many organizations and studies fueling the global warming
alarmism are funded by governments and not suprisingly endorse MORE government (in the form
of regulations, regulatory agencies, taxes, fees, etc...) as a supposed «solution» to the problem.
Though I am concerned and devoted to the cause
of reducing plastic pollution in the ocean I
find the distortion and
alarmism of advocacy groups in this arena disturbing.
Somewhat ironically, it has been my
finding, as someone currently in the thick
of the business world, located in the US, that the business world is perhaps almost as much a boiling cauldron
of AGW
alarmism as are academia, government and the NGO world.
Most
of the government and media interest is in making sure that climate
alarmism rules and that
findings that contradict
alarmism get debunked, by hook or by crook.
Today's Neo-Malthusians (e.g., Neil Young, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., David Suzuki, Al Gore, and Bill McKibben) made up their minds decades ago on the climate question and have spent decades advancing a largely ideologically
founded campaign to limit growth via the mechanism
of environmental
alarmism.
For example, understanding that global warming is not a proven science and that there is no circumstantial evidence for global warming
alarmism — which is why we see goats like political charlatans like Al Gore showing debunked graphs like the «hockey stick» to scare the folks — and, not understanding that climate change the usual thing not the unusual thing and that the climate change we observed can be explained by natural causes is the only thing that really separates we the people from superstitious and ignorant government - funded schoolteachers on the issue
of global warming... that and the fact that global warming alarmists do not believe in the scientific method nor most
of the principles upon which the country was
founded.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) might have played this important role, but its leadership was quickly captured by political operatives, determined to support climate
alarmism, even when this was at odds with the
findings of honest scientists who wrote technical parts
of IPCC reports.
Incidentally, is it just me or does it seem telling that Richard Betts needs to go back 6 years to
find an example
of «
alarmism» in the mainstream media?
Based on the official university whitewashes
of Climategate thus far in support
of such corruption
of science for political ends, the odds must be that they will surely
find something, somewhere to pin on Wegman, to punish him for failing to validate the Hockey Stick, the poster child
of alarmism.
Yet these sensible and moderate
findings will be met with a predictable wall
of alarmism.
All they are pointing out is that the Liberal / Democrats generally support climate
alarmism and its proposed IPCC - style solutions
of central control to reduce CO2 emissions,, and the Conservative / Republican / Libertarians support a more skeptical viewpoint and non-governmental solutions if problem are
found to be real.
Al Gore thinks he might just have
found the holy grail
of climate change
alarmism: a peer - reviewed study «proving» that carbon dioxide actually makes you stupid.
IMO Max is one
of the few commenters on this blog who is genuinely seeking to
find common ground, and while we all know that he is rationally sceptical
of AGW
alarmism he deserves more respect that was accorded to him by VP on this occasion.
The fallacious
alarmism surrounding the Emperor Penguins «imminent extinction» can be
found in one
of Miesler's link to the Center
of Biological Diversity.
I do
find the extreme
alarmism in some
of my liberal friends and some others, but not any kind
of majority.
If applied to the climate issue, there is no doubt that would mean the end
of the Obama EPA's attempt to implement climate
alarmism in the US and hopefully the EPA CO2 Endangerment
Finding.
I
find these charges
of «
alarmism» by right - leaning pundits and «cherry picking» by conservatives like, Roger Pielke Jr., as little more than pejorative labelling.