Monday, March 03, 2008





Climate Skeptics Roast Gore On Global Warming

Skeptics, you say? As in rational thinkers who evaluate evidence? I better read this . . .

Al Gore, who won the Nobel Peace Prize and an Oscar for his environmental advocacy, was the main target on Monday at a conference of dissident scientists skeptical of his views on global warming.


[. . .]

"Whether we like it or not, it was extremely effective propaganda," said Timothy Ball, an environmental consultant and former climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg.

"It was appropriate that he got an Oscar from the land of make-believe," he joked.


Never let it be said that Timothy Ball doesn't have a keen sense of humor.

The gathering was sponsored by the Heartland Institute, a non-profit libertarian organization that studies environmental and other issues "from a free-market perspective" and argues that "property rights and markets do a better job than government bureaucracies."


Hey, wait -- for some reason I'm beginning to question the objectivity of these "skeptics." Maybe it's just paranoia, but that bit about the Heartland Institute's political bias would seem to cast its "environmental consultant's" skepticism in doubt. I'd even go so far as to suggest -- cautiously, of course -- that Ball and his friends have an ideological ax to grind that has less to do with science and more to do with . . . oh, hell, you know what I'm getting at.

Attendees watched a movie, "A Climate of Fear," by conservative TV commentator Glenn Beck, who charged that anyone who opposes the view that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are causing the earth to warm up, are branded "heretics or Nazis."


"Nazis," huh? Geez. That's a little harsh. Border-line crackpot, in fact. But I shouldn't be saying that because that would imply that I was a Nazi. (This Glenn Beck character plays a mean game.)

6 comments:

Justin said...

Hell, why do these guys stop at Global Warming? There are so many areas of "scientific study" to show up as the media born lies that they really are.

If you're going to blame 'the media' for popularizing the idea of Global Warming, which I assume includes books, as well as movies, why not take on other leftist-promoted, fear-inducing topics, such as species die-off (that crypto commie slut Bridget Stutchbury should be kicked out of the scientists club for promoting her book Silence of the Songbirds on Socialist Canada's CBC Quirks & Quarks! - thank God the Conservative government recently got rid of our national science adviser and replaced him with a committee of university heads, business leaders, and a few scientists - this Science based media conspiracy is going down!), or de-forestation (that scamp Michael Williams obviously knew what he was doing when he abridged his massive study "Deforesting The Earth", cutting it down [ha ha! get it!] to a mere 500 pages - and we all know how many people have read *that* book!), or hell, why stop there, let's go to the root of the problem and call out Charles Darwin for what he was: a complete and total media whore. Evolution... as if! Look at all the books he sold! Dude obviously did it all for the gold chains and the tricked out Hummers and the oiled up ho-ma's.

Anonymous said...

I am afraid this is a good example of the flat earth folks.

Debate should be good thing, particularly when it is engaged in by people seeking to discuss real issues using the best factual information available.

What men like those associated with the Heartland Institute put forward is not debate, but a purposeful distortion backed by hateful language and personal attacks.

Michael

dedroidify said...

I don't trust anything that comes from a damn politician. Watch the documentary "The Great Global Warming Swindle", it shows that Inconvenient Truth uses selective data to prove their point and if you look at that data more longterm their point is mute.

I'm as much concerned about the environment as anybody. But I don't trust a politician and his agendas. Fuck, Gore was vice-president, if he wanted to fix the environment he could have done so a long time ago.

I think it's a joke that he got the oscar and a freaking nobel prize, for peace no less. It's a joke.

You can bet that if their terrorism agenda backfires, they're gonna pull the global warming card. And anybody who threatens gaia will be labeled an enemy of peace and freedom, subhuman and anything else they use to label terrorists.

It's funny, terrorism is something they cause using false flag "operations".
Global Warming, if true, is something they caused with their "corporations".

Consensus reality...

Justin said...

I despair that people are debating this 'my documentary is better than your documentary' bollocks, but I understand that people don't often have time to look any deeper into the growing body of 'we're fucked' evidence.

Also, although you sound paranoid, dedroidfly, there is this four year old report: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2004/feb/22/usnews.theobserver

dedroidify said...

It's not about saying which docu is better than the other, it's about Gore using selective data and the other documentary exposing that. I saw both, have you?

And I'm supposed to trust a freaking pentagon report? Maybe you aren't paranoid enough. "A secret report, suppressed by US defence chiefs and obtained by The Observer" -> rofl

here, I'll raise you this article:
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20080303175301.aspx

Earlier at the conference Lord Christopher Monckton, a policy adviser to former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, told an audience that the science will eventually prevail and the “scare” of global warming will go away. He also said the courts were a good avenue to show the science.

Justin said...

Do I even have to comment on that website? "Advancing The Culture Of Free Enterprise In America". Well, at least they wear their bias on their shoulder.

And oh boy, a nobleman, a businessman and a whisperer in the ears of politicians said something against Global Warming. And it looks like he has a reputation for doing so.

Didn't you say yourself that you would never trust a 'damn politician'? I'm sensing some contradictions in your reasoning.

I've seen the power point presentation that Al Gore gave that eventually became An Inconvenient Truth. Otherwise, I prefer to stick with books, and god forbid, primary sources, that are filled with, whatyacall, data? Call me crazy but I don't give a toss what business leaders are saying.

And Global Warming or not, the world is riddled with anthropogenic bullet holes. Which was the whole point of my first comment above.