The Climate Change Climate Change

Among the many reasons President Barack Obama and the Democratic majority are so intent on quickly jamming a cap-and-trade system through Congress is because the global warming tide is again shifting. ..The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Full Story »

Posted by Walter Cox - via Opinion Source
Tags Help
Subjects: World, Politics, Sci/Tech
Topics: Global Warming, Climate Change
Editorial Help
Posted by: Posted by Walter Cox - Jun 26, 2009 - 2:07 PM PDT
Content Type: Article
Edit Lock: This story can be edited
Edited by: Dwight Rousu - Jun 29, 2009 - 2:10 AM PDT
Terry Gamble
1.9
by Terry Gamble - Jun. 27, 2009

This is an unbalanced opinion piece cherry picking data. It altogether neglects citing the findings of leading NASA scientists.

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Walter Cox
4.2
by Walter Cox - Jun. 26, 2009

An excellent analysis of the collapsing "consensus" regarding man-made global warming. As the author makes clear, peer-reviewed scientific research has debunked all the politically correct doomsday scenarios that have been pushed during the last decade--AND the earth's temperatures have not risen for the past eight years.

Hopefully this article will have an impact on the cap-and-trade legislation now being rammed through Congress. To enact such enormously expensive measures, when the science is so unconvincing and the economy so fragile, seems nothing short of reckless to this observer. We cannot let ideology, in the form of scientific orthodoxy, blind us to the evidence.

See Full Review » (12 answers)
William Hughes-Games
4.1
by William Hughes-Games - Jun. 29, 2009

A good review of the present level of consensus on climate change.

Science is not democracy. What is right is right regardless of how many or few scientists hold a particular opinion. Science history is full of cases in which the minority turned out to be correct. It might be more useful to look at the consequensis of being wrong. If we believe in sudden catastrophic climate change and we are wrong, we will have taken some useful steps to, for instance, reduce our use of fossil fuels which quite frankly are far to valuable to burn. If we don't ... More »

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

2.9

Average
from 4 reviews (40% confidence)
Quality
2.8
Information
2.5
Insight
2.2
Style
3.0
Context
1.7
Expertise
3.0
Originality
3.3
Relevance
3.3
Responsibility
2.7
Popularity
3.2
Recommendation
3.0
Credibility
3.5
# Reviews
2.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

  • Thoughts: Global Warming - anthropogenic or not Pending

  • Thoughts: Arctic melting - no problem

    The melting of the arctic sea ice is proceeding at least 2 decades ahead of the predictions of the most extreme models. It is most likely that we will see a virtually ice free ...