Talking Points on parade

Here is a perfect example of how the regressive progressive members of our society work to spread their propaganda. First we have Steve Connor's little tirade over at the UK Independent. Now, we have Greg Laden echoing the same drivel, point for point at a US based website:

Dollars for Deniers: Big Oil Funds Climate Science Denialism
It has become increasingly difficult to understand the motivation behind climate science denialism. The Earth�s climate is changing, mainly in the form of increased temperatures of the oceans and the atmosphere, because of the release of copious amounts of previously trapped Carbon through the burning of fossil fuels. There is no longer a question that this is happening, and every year, the various details that one might like to see worked out, regarding the mechanisms or effects of climate change, are increasingly known. To state, with a straight face, that the jury is still out, or that we can�t separate natural variation from human caused changes, or that the earth has stopped warming for the last decade, or any of the other things we constantly hear from climate change denialists is exactly the same thing as standing there with a big sign that reads �I am a moron.� Politicians, who by and large remain ignorant of all sorts of science, have become aware of this over recent years and many now couch their phraseology in cautious terms, if they happen to be running there campaigns, as many are, on the Oil Teat. Even more amazing, principled Libertarians have stopped denying the reality of climate change, taking a different tact to avoid any responsibility or action: Yes, the climate change we�ve been busy denying the reality of for the last 30 years is real, they agree, but it is too late to do anything about it now so let�s just move inland as the sea level rises and buy lighter jackets.

Talk about run-on writing. Mr. Laden seriously needs an editor. OK: It has become increasingly difficult to understand the motivation behind climate science denialism. It is simple really -- people recognize scientific steamrolling when it happens. Computer models being published as fact when there is no corroborating evidence and the models themselves are not made public. Observational data doesn't support the model. The Earth�s climate is changing, mainly in the form of increased temperatures of the oceans and the atmosphere, because of the release of copious amounts of previously trapped Carbon through the burning of fossil fuels. Point one -- the last nineteen years have seen on overall cooling of the earths temperatures. Point two -- yes, the release of CO2 will have a warming effect but it is trivial, less than a degree over the next hundred years. Earth's climate is variable, we are leaving an Ice Age and the fossil record shows that we have been gradually warming for several thousand years. There is no longer a question that this is happening, and every year, the various details that one might like to see worked out, regarding the mechanisms or effects of climate change, are increasingly known. Sorry -- abject bullshit. To state, with a straight face, that the jury is still out, or that we can�t separate natural variation from human caused changes, or that the earth has stopped warming for the last decade, or any of the other things we constantly hear from climate change denialists is exactly the same thing as standing there with a big sign that reads �I am a moron.� #1) - The jury is in -- your side doesn't support the measurable evidence. #2) - Natural variation and anthropogenic variation can be separated out just fine.. #3) - Earth hasn't stopped warming for the last decade, it's nineteen years - almost two decades. #4 - Better to be called a moron by a useful idiot than to have one's head willfully stuck in the sand. Politicians, who by and large remain ignorant of all sorts of science, have become aware of this over recent years and many now couch their phraseology in cautious terms, if they happen to be running there campaigns, as many are, on the Oil Teat. Since when are Politicians the font of wisdom. They are politicians after all -- their job is to toe the line of the majority of their constituents. If the majority of their constituents think that catastrophic anthropogenic global warming is a vastly overhyped piece of flaming junk science, it is their job to reflect that belief in their voting record. As for the Oil teat -- where is my check? How much money is given to Republican politicians from oil businesses as opposed to Democratic politicians -- some time spent on Open Secrets would be fun... Even more amazing, principled Libertarians have stopped denying the reality of climate change, taking a different tact to avoid any responsibility or action: Yes, the climate change we�ve been busy denying the reality of for the last 30 years is real, they agree, but it is too late to do anything about it now so let�s just move inland as the sea level rises and buy lighter jackets. First of all, the word is Tack, not Tact. Libertarians are better thinkers -- they might not vote correctly*** but they strongly value independent thought and come to their own conclusions. Looking at the data we have, the earth has been cooling. The climate 'models' do not incorporate the sun as a variable star and the 'models' do not hindcast -- given the last thousand years of climate data, they predict wildly different weather for today than we currently have. If they cannot hindcast worth a damn, why should we believe that they are able to forecast with any level of accuracy. Boots on the ground measurement do not support the Global Warming theory. Period. You can weep, wring your hands and wave them around but that will not change the measured and verified facts. It may not fit your agenda but that is life. Change your agenda. This is what adults do all the time... *** Had all the Libertarians and Ron Paul-ites bit their tongues and voted for Mitt Romney, he would be our President instead of Barry O'Bungler.