I'd add that I am still waiting for one of the big denier groups to sue Al Gore, David Suzuki, Michael Mann or the IPCC like they have threatened to do so often. Please, sue! I can't wait for the discovery motions. I'll put the contents of say, the CRU's private emails up against what came out just from the Heartland Institute's document leak any time. We've seen the dirty laundry of leading climatologists, and it wasn't dirty. The wealthy interests who fund the climate denialism industry don't even want us to know who they are, never mind their behind the scenes strategy and planning documentation.
Meanwhile, 30,000 people mostly without climatology credentials signed a petition, a creationist Republican Senator and cult member has a big list of scientists who supposedly question the consensus, and a fake member of the UK House of Lords who claims to have cured Graves' disease doubts the consensus. Denialists, these are your champions. The longer you cling to this, the more embarassing it will be to eventually be forced to admit you've been wrong. It's pretty damn embarassing already. Galileo, my ass. Scientists mocked alchemy and phrenology too, and guess what, they were right.
I'm so glad to see a post by you daniel on my RSS reader!
ReplyDeleteI'd add that I am still waiting for one of the big denier groups to sue Al Gore, David Suzuki, Michael Mann or the IPCC like they have threatened to do so often.
any day now...
Um, what is this denial 'case' you refer to anyway? I don't think the deniers have a case, they don't need one. Remember, its the alarmists who are making the claims of future catastrophe, it is up to the alarmists to support those claims. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof, and so far that hasn't been delivered. Its easy being a denier, all one needs to do is pick holes in the alarmists evidence. But deniers aren't really making any claims, they don't have a case that I am aware of, they don't require a case. So what is their case again?
ReplyDelete