Global Warming Scare Tactics

ScienceChic wrote: Yeah, I saw the article Hinderaker posted today in his Powerlineblog. He's just repeating the same stuff from others that's already debunked (see previous post with links). Any paragraph that starts out with this sentence

The catastrophic anthropogenic global warming theory is based entirely on models,

is full of it b/c that's absolutely not true.

BlazerBob wrote: As a scientist you should know that bull sh** piled higher and deeper is still bull sh**.

The same applies to those who continue to deny the facts and blatantly misrepresent the truth in order to maintain the status quo of lining their cushy pockets at the expense of the world. When the goal posts have to keep getting moved that's when you know you're being fed a line of crap. First it was "there is no global warming, we need to study it more to be sure" to "there's global warming but it's not our fault" to "there's global warming and we have a small part in it, but it won't be as bad as the 'alarmists' claim, actually it'll be beneficial for plants" to "there's global warming and we're directly influencing it, but drastically doing anything to stop it will severely damage our economy". Nothing the deniers have argued has had valid merit, they've come up with no credible counter-claims backed by observation and repeatable experimentation, they've modified their positions when the evidence was so overwhelming as to be embarrassing, and they continue to bleat the last few misconceptions that they can to avoid a reality that climate scientists have been accurately and consistently predicting.

ScienceChic wrote: Here's the problem with Spencer - he manipulates his graphs in an unethical manner to show the results he wants, not reality.