Appearing before the Commons Committee on Environment and Sustainable Development last year, Carleton University paleoclimatologist Professor Tim Patterson testified, "There is no meaningful correlation between CO2 levels and Earth's temperature over this [geologic] time frame. In fact, when CO2 levels were over ten times higher than they are now, about 450 million years ago, the planet was in the depths of the absolute coldest period in the last half billion years." Patterson asked the committee, "On the basis of this evidence, how could anyone still believe that the recent relatively small increase in CO2 levels would be the major cause of the past century's modest warming?"
"The man is an embarrassment to US science and its many fine practitioners, a lot of whom know (but feel unable to state publicly) that his propaganda crusade is mostly based on junk science."
2006-06-14
06:20:54
·
19 answers
·
asked by
equityfirstproperties
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
He's not, Professor Patterson is the exception to most of the scientific community with regard to global warming. Stop letting your political views cloud your capacity to learn the truth, here's a link http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/globalwarming.html
2006-06-14 06:32:26
·
answer #1
·
answered by Elusive 5
·
3⤊
1⤋
Why is Bush such a liar and alarmist? Why did he lie about Iraq having WMDs and then send thousands off to die? By the way, where is Osama bin Laden? It's been nearly 5 years since the 9/11 attacks took place, and he STILL hasn't been found!
It's interesting you should quote this scientist, though. Not too long ago, there was a "60 Minutes" interview with a NASA scientist who wrote a report stating that we have 10 years left to reverse the global warming trend. However, officials in the Bush administration saw fit to edit the report to downplay the danger. I guess Bush & Co. didn't want to tick off their buddies in the oil industry!
Denial is NOT a river in Egypt!
2006-06-14 06:32:55
·
answer #2
·
answered by tangerine 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Tim Patterson of Carleton University is not a climatologist. He studies climates that happen millions of years ago. Back they we couldn't even breathe on this planet. Would you listen to an English teacher teaching biology?
Why are people afraid of admitting that we have a problem with the Earth's environment?
There is hard science out there.
2006-06-14 06:38:31
·
answer #3
·
answered by Blackbird2004 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You are a scientist & have seen his movie. What happpened
450 yrs. ago is irrevelant. The CO2 comming from our machines
is destroying the earth's ozone layer, therefor allowing in more
of the sun's heat. You have nothing to worry about, it's your
offspring & their offspring that will feel the effects.
Tim Patterson is a dangerous liar who I find alarming.
I must add that bush also didn't believe scientists when they
told him Katrina was comming.
I have more info, the 10 hottest days in recorded history have
happened since 1990.
160 countries have signed a treaty to lower emissions, yet, our
pres. still refuses, claiming it will have a negative effect on
economic growth. Sad.
2006-06-14 06:37:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by Calee 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think antijones hasthe final and factual basis included in answering this question.
I agree with the vast vast majority of scientists on this issue.
You Republicans are idiots!
"But, again, why is it that the IPCC can find 2,500 of the world's top climate scientists to agree that climate change is a real and pressing threat; Dr. Gordon McBean can round up 90 of Canada's most accomplished experts in the field in less than a week to sign a petition arguing in favour of federal action on climate change; and yet the little cabal of "friends" and "truth" tellers is so exclusive?
Sometimes being unorthodox means standing up courageously against conventional wisdom. But sometimes it just means that you're wrong."
2006-06-14 07:58:54
·
answer #5
·
answered by ngrimmm 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Publicity?
2006-06-14 06:25:40
·
answer #6
·
answered by Simplystunning 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
He is much more believable than the current president. He actually addresses serious issues that have been continuously ignored by the current administration, which spends most its time being alarmist (i.e. marriage amendments???? this is non-issue, used only to distract peoples attention from what is actually going on)
2006-06-14 06:47:53
·
answer #7
·
answered by bored in Michigan 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Think back! Think back. Al Gore is a politician and uses any (twisted, useless, or any ol') facts to bolster his political position.
Is your butter more yellow than it has been? INVESTIGATE.
Children in Ohio look "sadder" than those in Maine? SUE. (who?)
Penguins in danger? CALL OUT THE MARINES!!
Look out. The sky is falling!
"Honesty? I don't need no stinkin' honesty" I'm a politician.
2006-06-14 06:37:52
·
answer #8
·
answered by Puzzleman 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
He doesn't have anything substantial to add to public discourse; facts do not support his claims. He refuses to do a little critical thinking so all he has left is making wild accusations and alarmist claims to make a name for himself.
2006-06-14 06:47:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
He has admitted that he exagerates in order to make people alarmed enough to take action. I think he has convinced himself that there is a major crisis. That's his baby. It justifies his whole reason for being and all his political ambition.
2006-06-14 06:29:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by RunningOnMT 5
·
0⤊
0⤋