Not saying all this is gospel but there are a few things I agree with like this part:
Alarmism over climate is of great benefit to many, providing government funding for academic research and a reason for government bureaucracies to grow. Alarmism also offers an excuse for governments to raise taxes, taxpayer-funded subsidies for businesses that understand how to work the political system, and a lure for big donations to charitable foundations promising to save the planet.
Whatever they're doing with the money doesn't seem to be working anyway because the weather is still changing... I guess we just haven't thrown enough money at it yet.
And if this part is true, it seems rather telling:
Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted—or worse. They have good reason to worry. In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed article with the politically incorrect (but factually correct) conclusion that the recent warming is not unusual in the context of climate changes over the past thousand years. The international warming establishment quickly mounted a determined campaign to have Dr. de Freitas removed from his editorial job and fired from his university position. Fortunately, Dr. de Freitas was able to keep his university job.
I thought the scientific community was supposed to welcome opposing views...
"My cat's breath smells like cat food." - R. Wiggum
He feared being fired, but wasn't. That's the biggest conspiracy you could find about a scientist not being allowed to publish the truth? All I know about that case is what you presented, and based on that presumably biased slant it still doesn't come across as damning, or casting doubt on the scientific community. I don't think average global temperature was ever the crux (or any part at all) of the "we need to stop polluting" movement. It's just the easiest measuring stick to apply to it because of a superficial name.
Not sure how you got the impression I was going for the "biggest conspiracy theory I could find". I just found an article from a mainstream source and thought it was good timing, so I posted it.
Still there are plenty of examples of some scientific research being suppressed while other research isn't. If you want more conclusive evidence you can just go back to the Rick Perry article on the first page of this thread. Besides the long history of it happening before climate change alarmism was trendy.
Skin Blues wrote:I don't think average global temperature was ever the crux (or any part at all) of the "we need to stop polluting" movement. It's just the easiest measuring stick to apply to it because of a superficial name.
This part is a little confusing... You're saying global temperature was never part of the "we need to stop polluting" movement but it's just the easiest measuring stick to apply to it. How did that term get attached if it was never part of the argument?
I'll try to answer anyway... Even when I was in school the first thing I heard about the hole in the ozone was that it was caused by pollution from cars and spray cans and they always showed that little diagram showing the dangerous UV rays making their way inside the ozone and unable to get back out which inevitably led to global warming as they (arbitrarily?) called it back then. I've heard that the proverbial hole in the ozone has closed since then (I've also heard that it hasn't) but I guess climate change is still going strong.
Other than that, I don't really have much aside from the thousands of articles from mostly mainstream sources that quite clearly make a correlation between pollution and climate change. I suppose I can link you to a search if you like...
"My cat's breath smells like cat food." - R. Wiggum
Let me tell you about a girl I know, Had a drink about a hour ago. Sitting in a corner by herself, in a bar in downtown Hell. She heard a noise and she looked through the door. And saw a man she'd never seen before. Light skin, light blue eyes, a double-chin and a plastic smile. Well, her heart raced as he walked in the door And took an empty seat next to her at the bar. "My brand new car is parked right outside. How'd ya like to go for a ride?" And she said."Wait a minute I have to think." He said, "That's fine. May I please buy you a drink" One drink turned into three or four and they left and got into his car And they drove away someplace real far. Now babe the time has come. How'd ya like to have a little fun? And she said."If we could only please be on our way, I will not run."
Later that day, Mimi was invited by Dave Powers, to an after-work party. When she arrived at the residence, Powers and two other young females were waiting.
Powers poured, and frequently refilled, her glass with daiquiris until the he arrived. He invited her for a personal tour. She got up, expecting the rest of the group to follow. They didn’t.
He took her to his wife's room. “I noticed he was moving closer and closer. I could feel his breath on my neck. He put his hand on my shoulder,” she recounts. The next thing she knew, he was standing above her, looking directly into her eyes and guiding her to the edge of the bed.
“Slowly, he unbuttoned the top of my shirtdress and touched my breasts. “Then he reached up between my legs and started to pull off my underwear. “I finished unbuttoning my shirtdress and let it fall off my shoulders.”
He pulled down his pants but, with his shirt still on, hovered above her on the bed. He smelled of his cologne, 4711.
He paused when he noticed her resisting. “Haven’t you done this before?” he asked. “No,” she said. “Are you OK?” he asked.