I am not going to accuse him of being paid to take on a brief. But to my mind there are remarkable similarities in his presentation of the case against man made global warming to that of a very talented lawyer defending someone who 'is as guilty as a puppy on a carpet beside a pile of poo' (Blackadder - British TV comedy)
Any comments - good natured please as Mr Jello always is.
2007-10-17 04:35:17 · 3 answers · asked by Robert A 5 in Environment ➔ Global Warming
No, but I do believe in objectivism. To be true the facts need to stand up independently of the person who is making the claim. This isn't the case for global warming. With gw, you need the 'consensus' of specific climatologist to tell you what the tea leaves say. If a person doesn't agree with the consensus, then he's removed from the consensus so the ruling from the consensus is unanimous.
There is no method to show us if it will be warmer or cooler 5 years from now. Any statement would just be a guess. A coin flip would be just as accurate.
2007-10-18 22:53:16 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Mr Jello is right thats why. This whole man made global warming thing is all a bunch of b/s
2007-10-17 14:44:26 · answer #2 · answered by Reality Has A Libertarian Bias 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
That explains everything. Even that horrid Announcer.
2007-10-17 11:58:56 · answer #3 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋