From: Delirium delirium@rufus.d2g.com
tarquin wrote:
Sheldon Rampton wrote:
(3) In a number of cases, Ed has inserted claims
that are clearly
false and misleading, such as his statement awhile
back that
"Environmentalists and atmospheric scientists are
at odds over the
global warming hypothesis." This statement (which
has since been
removed in the usual self-correcting wiki way)
deceptively suggested
that the debate over global warming is between
"environmentalists"
vs. "scientists," when in fact the debate is
between "proponents of
the global warming hypothesis" (a group that
includes most
environmentalists and most atmospheric scientists)
vs. "global
warming skeptics" (a group that includes mostly
non-scientists such
as Ed himself).
Tarquin
it seems to me that most global warming skeptics
are from the US.
For example, all the major political parties in the
UK support Kyoto.
Delirium
This is getting off-topic, but one should be careful not to automatically link treaties like the Kyoto protocol and the scientific debate over global warming. The consensus that global warming occurs is fairly strong, but the consensus that the Kyoto protocol is the right thing to do about it is significantly less strong--that is, there are people who think global warming exists who nonetheless think that the Kyoto protocol is not the right way to fix it. This is, notably, the official US position on
the >issue ("we need to do something about global warming, >but this isn't that something"), mostly due to >concerns that Kyoto gives developing countries a free >ride, and so just encourages moving polluting
factories out of 1st-world countries, resulting in no
net benefit to the global ecosystem.
(Note that I'm ambivalent on the issue myself, just noting that this distinction does exist. Perhaps
Bush >is a bad example to pick since you may or may not >believe the sincerity of his views on this issue, but
there are more legitimate scientists who hold similar viewpoints.)
Yes ? Is it an affirmation or is it an assumption you are making ?
Do you have names of legitimate scientists who hold the viewpoint that Kyoto is not a good solution to provide ?
In particular, do you have names of non-american "legitimate" scientists who hold that point of view ?
Then, if there are many (?) american scientifics who hold that point of view, but none non-american, how do you define "consensus" ? Compared to say, many indian scientifics who hold while no american do ?
The above argument you provide against Kyoto is political. Where are the scientific arguments
When you write "The consensus that global warming occurs is fairly strong, but the consensus that the Kyoto protocol is the right thing to do about it is significantly less strong", are you talking about a poorly significant consensus among politicians, or are you talking of a poorly significant consensus among scientists ?
"that is, there are people who think global warming exists who nonetheless think that the Kyoto protocol is not the right way to fix it."
Yup. There are people... people...
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com