Global Warming and Nature's Thermostat

As long as the global warming pessimists can convince the public that we skeptics are simply shills for Big Oil, they do not have to address our scientific arguments. The claims that there are no peer-reviewed scientific articles that oppose a manmade source of global warming are, quite simply, wrong. Fortunately, the tide is slowly turning, and increasing numbers of scientists are now speaking out about their doubts concerning mankind's role in recent ... Full Story »

Posted by Walter Cox

See All Reviews »

Review

Dan Kennedy
1.9
by Dan Kennedy - Dec. 3, 2008

This is not journalism at all. It is assertion, backed up with a lot of facts that may or may not have been taken out of context. Precisely because lay people should not be expected to judge the technical aspects of science, Spencer's work is not helpful to our understanding even if it turns out that he's correct. It is no substitute for a well-researched, well-reported news story in which we would hear from numerous expert sources.

I am making no attempt to verify the information that Spencer presents. My entire argument is that such an exercise would be antithetical to the spirit of what we should be trying to accomplish with NewsTrust. No lay person could possibly have anything useful to say about the argument Spencer lays out. And - oh, my - it turns out that Spencer is a creationist, too, although he would be hopping mad at having that label applied to him. See link, "Faith-Based Evolution."

See All Reviews »

Dan's Rating

Overall
1.9

Poor
from 11 answers
Quality
2.1
Information
2.0
Insight
2.0
Style
1.0
Context
2.0
Enterprise
4.0
Expertise
2.0
Originality
3.0
Popularity
1.0
Recommendation
1.0
Credibility
1.0
More How our ratings work »