Comments on: Why Climate Science Is On Trial

By: Kate

Kate — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 03:05:22 +0000

Johan Rockstrom, cited in “A Failed System: The World Crisis of Capitalist Globalization and its Impact on China” by John Bellamy Foster http://www.oid-ido.org/article.php3?id_article=808
“In addressing capitalism as a failed system I have focused first on the deepening economic crisis. But this is not the worst of the world’s problems. The greatest peril is the growing threat of planetary ecological collapse. Here the danger is much greater than in the case of the world economy”

By: Kate

Kate — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 03:04:08 +0000

James Lovelock: “Perhaps one day the children we shall share with Gaia will peacefully co-operate with the great mammals of the ocean and use whale power to travel faster and faster in the mind, as horse power once carried us over the ground.”

Gaia A new look at life on Earth, by James Lovelock (1979) http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/works/us/gaia.htm

By: Kate

Kate — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 02:46:52 +0000

This might also help to explain the position of the BBC and UK academia. 13 Trillion Dollars.

http://www.iigcc.org/index.aspx

“The group currently has over 50 members, including some of the largest pension funds and asset managers in Europe, and represents assets of around €4trillion. A full list of members is available on the membership page”.

The IIGCC are not alone. On 14th January 2010 an association of similar groups published at statement calling for more action, quicker, ‘cos they’ve got investments to protect… I mean, to save the planet. And UNEP have their fingers in that as well.
The world’s largest investors released a statement calling on the U.S. and other governments to quickly adopt strong national climate policies that will establish a stable investment climate and thus spur low-carbon investments to reduce emissions causing climate change. At December’s Copenhagen Climate Change Summit it was estimated that private-sector investors will need to finance more than 85 percent of the global transition to a low-carbon economy.

The Investor Statement on Catalyzing Investment in a Low-Carbon Economy, http://www.Unepfi.org, 14 January 2010, calls for rapid action on carbon emission limits, energy efficiency, renewable energy, financing mechanisms and other policies. The statement was endorsed by four groups representing more than 190 investors with more than US$ 13 trillion of assets – Investor Network on Climate Risk (INCR), Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change (IIGCC), Investor Group on Climate Change (IGCC) and the United Nations Environment Programme Finance Initiative (UNEP FI).

By: CosmicConservative

CosmicConservative — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 04:24:52 +0000

You can bet that beyond the acknowledged criminal acts committed by Jones et. al. that there are currently a group of scientists and editors hiring lawyers to pursue civil charges against this cadre of con men who conspired to wreck their careers and slime their reputations.

To read garbage like this article which tries to whitewash what these reprobates have done boils my blood. As I said in my original comment, people like Walter Russel Mead are part of the problem.

By: Politics and Science of AGW « The Ninth Law

Politics and Science of AGW « The Ninth Law — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 03:45:21 +0000

[...] Politics in the AGW arena. You may have seen it already, but if not, take a moment to look over Why Climate Science is on Trial. Read the whole thing. However absurd the skepticism in a particular case, in a general way a [...]

By: yeahright

yeahright — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 21:10:50 +0000

biased garbage. you can tell immediately by the hyperbole about vaccines.

By: RealScientist

RealScientist — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:47:37 +0000

Will the media please stop referring to these hacks as “scientists”. I’m so tried of reading “scientist’s say….”. What absolute BS. Some twit with a degree in journalism is going to tell us what “scientist’s say”. They must name their sources and not group all scientists as one group just because their hero Al Gore says there is a “consensus”. Did any of these “journalists” ever attempt to trace down the source of the claim of “consensus”? Or did they just blindly help build a self-fulfilling echo chamber? I did track the source down and the whole notion is a joke. I am a scientist and I sure as hell am not part of this “consensus”. Yet these media jokers all fell in line and now they just look stupid. Just brain dead stupid. This whole mess started due to political expediency and so skeptical REAL scientists were shown the door, mocked, and ridiculed. The media is still too arrogant and condescending to admit they have been duped and some outlets seem to just rather go extinct from their low ratings and loss of credibility than to admit they not only were extremely biased but picked the wrong side. Ten years or even five years ago I would have tolerated the Warm mongers if they just admitted they may have exaggerated the issue. Now, after all the abuse the skeptics have had to endure (and real scientists are skeptical by nature) I hope all proponents of AGW burn in hell for what they have done to the credibility of science and the resources they have wasted that could have been put to real environmental issues. Burn in hell you selfish arrogant evil twits. I can only hope you guys get more than a little taste of your own medicine. The media has no excuse as they have fallen for climate scare stories since the printing press and never learn. It’s time they just try to report the news and not pretend to understand it. Leave that to their readers who are more qualified to understand it or certainly not any worse.

By: jd

jd — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:46:36 +0000

So it seems trafamadore was a “Drive By” commentor. Seems he’s had several rebuttals but his evidence is a little lacking.

CRICKETS CHIRPING!

By: Skysailer

Skysailer — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:18:43 +0000

All you need to know before you read the article to understand where the writer is going and what conclusions he will support, is to look at his examples: South Africa incident, Nigerian Muslim Rebels, and an author from the Socialist newspaper The Guardian.

Enough said for his whitewash.

By: Phil

Phil — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 19:14:54 +0000

Public funding of science leads to the politicization of that issue. Look at Nixon’s “war on cancer” and the billions spent since. Cancer rates have not changed. Today, virtually all cancer research is chasing the same, government supported, theory of mutation. There are other theories, but following them will not bring in the generous government grants and prestigious academic appointments. Which would you choose?

The free market, with very limited government intrustion, is the only solution.