Larry Gude
Strung Out
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/harris061206.htm
Discuss religion with modern libs and you will typically get some rant about the religious right and born again whack jobs believing things you can't prove. The more devout your faith the more it offends them. They are people of science. They are people of reason and truth and facts.
Enter The Church of Global Warming featuring Rev. AlGore.
"Scientists have an independent obligation to respect and present the truth as they see it," Al Gore sensibly asserts in his film "An Inconvenient Truth", showing at Cumberland 4 Cinemas in Toronto since Jun 2. With that outlook in mind, what do world climate experts actually think about the science of his movie?
Professor Bob Carter of the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University, in Australia gives what, for many Canadians, is a surprising assessment: "Gore's circumstantial arguments are so weak that they are pathetic. It is simply incredible that they, and his film, are commanding public attention."
But surely Carter is merely part of what most people regard as a tiny cadre of "climate change skeptics" who disagree with the "vast majority of scientists" Gore cites?
No; Carter is one of hundreds of highly qualified non-governmental, non-industry, non-lobby group climate experts who contest the hypothesis that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are causing significant global climate change. "Climate experts" is the operative term here. Why? Because what Gore's "majority of scientists" think is immaterial when only a very small fraction of them actually work in the climate field.
Discuss religion with modern libs and you will typically get some rant about the religious right and born again whack jobs believing things you can't prove. The more devout your faith the more it offends them. They are people of science. They are people of reason and truth and facts.
Enter The Church of Global Warming featuring Rev. AlGore.
Carter does not pull his punches about Gore's activism, "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."