Are they still trying to say that the world is cooling or that the world would be nice with a little more warmth? Can the FCC shut them down for comitting fraud with their anti environmental rhetoric?
2007-11-17 02:58:01 · 13 answers · asked by Dennis H 4 in Environment ➔ Global Warming
Exactly! So-Called "Global Warming" is a political issue, where a pseudo science is being used to 'swift boat' and muzzle political opponents.
There is no desire to debate the science, to look for new information. Believers eyes are closed for new data. The Earth is flat they claim, and they use the UN as their church for their Inquisitions.
This - This post is EXACTLY why "global warming" needs to be shut down, stop the funding of the politics. The science and politics is too intertwined to be objective.
2007-11-17 03:13:22 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 4⤊ 5⤋
Actually Rush Limbaugh and the like are the ones exposing the lies about global warming. Even the founder of the Weather Channel said its a hoax. Lets see 30 years ago it was Global cooling. That was a lie. Now global warming is being proven a lie. What will they come out with next. Global moderate temperatures. Or will they go back to global cooling.
2007-11-20 23:55:58 · answer #2 · answered by Whats Up Doc 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Rush is on some kick about some wind pattern in the northern hemisphere is creating a slight change in the global climate. We humans have nothing to do with it.
He is still blaming it on the Sierra Club and Liberals who are using the issue simply for political gain.
The FCC can do nothing as he is protected by the 1st Ammendment. Im sure Rush would say that his mad ramblings act as a "redress of greivances", using language from the Bill of Rights.
2007-11-17 03:07:31 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
You should be asking what the skeptical scientists are saying now.
Anthony Watts is working on improving the quality of surface stations because poorly sited stations cause a warm bias.
http://surfacestations.org
Roger Pielke has said man is changing the climate but it is land use/land cover changes that are most responsible for recent warming, not CO2.
http://climatesci.colorado.edu/2007/09/02/summary-conclusions-of-climate-science/
Stephen Schwartz of Brookhaven National Lab recently published a peer reviewed paper showing that climate sensitivity is not nearly as great as we once thought and will not be catastrophic.
http://www.ecd.bnl.gov/steve/pubs/HeatCapacity.pdf
Roy Spencer observed a new negative feedback not known before but hypothesized by Richard Lindzen. This will change the way the GCMs run but will not increase the predictive power of the GCMs.
http://blog.acton.org/uploads/Spencer_07GRL.pdf
And now Craig Loehle has just published a new 2,000 year reconstruction without using tree ring data (the National Academy of Sciences has said strip bark data is not a temperature proxy and should not be used). He found that temps were 0.3C higher during the Medieval Warm Period than today.
http://www.ncasi.org/publications/Detail.aspx?id=3025
2007-11-17 03:21:01 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
The United Nations' Nobel Prize-winning panel on climate change approved the final installment of its landmark report on global warming on Friday, concluding that even the best efforts at reducing CO2 levels will not be enough and that the world must also focus on adapting to "abrupt and irreversible" climate changes.
Man can’t change what man didn’t cause
2007-11-17 04:18:51 · answer #5 · answered by mission_viejo_california 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
Here is a good example of why the environmental movement has morphed into a religion. Anyone who questions the dogma is a heretic and should be punished for their sin. Why not have an actual debate about it?
Also, before you go calling Rush a liar, perhaps you should listen to his show. You obviously don't. He does not deny global warming. His position is that he does not believe global warming is the result of human activity. He believes it is the result of nature and cycles.
In truth, lots of scientists believe this. Your prophet, Al Gore, simply dismisses them out of hand, since they question his dogma. The main stream media and left wing bloggers ignore those who don't go along.
Remember in the 1970s, is was the Al Gore types who were predicting global cooling, not the Rush Limbaugh types. They were wrong, but that seems to matter to no one.
2007-11-17 03:15:28 · answer #6 · answered by Will 2 · 4⤊ 5⤋
Rush is actually part of the solution, I'd say that if they taped his mouth shut for a week, the world would see an instant 25% reduction in greenhouse gas!
2007-11-17 03:12:44 · answer #7 · answered by groingo 4 · 3⤊ 2⤋
You should watch what you say. I bet you're a democrat the racism is obvious. Did you know Al Gore's environmental movie had over 11 mistakes and its a documentary. And the same scientists that say the earth is under Global warming said it was Freezing years ago. They went from one extreme to another.
2007-11-17 03:09:16 · answer #8 · answered by Iris S 2 · 3⤊ 4⤋
The truth
2007-11-17 03:38:45 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
NO freedom of speech you can say any B.S. you like its constitutionally protected.
here's a thought change the station if no one listens to these TARDS then there out of job and will go away.
2007-11-17 03:06:21 · answer #10 · answered by j2 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋