Friday, December 18, 2009

Climategate Continued -- From the Mouths of Scientists

Full disclosure: I make sure to always turn my office light off, even as others leave theirs on to give the appearance of still being at work. I try to unplug electronic devices that I am not using whenever I can. I recycle. I take short showers. We buy energy efficient devices. I've planted my share of trees. I don't litter. I love to hike (have a love/hate relationship with camping).

But this editorial needs to be read. I started this blog with the intention of taking those things that are generally accepted and challenging those ideas to the extent that they are at least talked about. I am concerned by ANY politically charged scientific theorem in which there is a lot of money to be made. Yes, oil companies fund research, but they also have invested billions of dollars in the green industry (and there is a GREEN INDUSTRY). Cap & Trade has the possibility of inventing value where none previously existed. There is plenty of money that funds the "climate change" side as well and I think it is disingenuous to ignore it.

My view on climate change is that if there is a 10% that it is true, we need to do everything we can to address it. As such, Climate-gate really doesn't effect my world-view on this issue. However, I think that if there is a 10% chance that it is NOT true, we need to have a vigorous and fair debate. Even the appearance of impropriety in the scientific literature should be of great concern. I have yet to see a reasoned response to the claim that Anthropomorphic Climate Change "doubters" were excluded from the scientific literature, as noted in the above editorial. I'm still swapping out my light-bulbs, but I want to let the scientists speak.

ADDENDUM: Well someone's having fun in Copenhagen.

1 comment:

  1. First of all let me state that I know of no single person or entity that does not want a nice clean, healthy planet. No one is going to go on record as wanting to destroy the planet.
    But there is plenty of room for skeptics and debate on the climate issue.
    I have included several links that give reason for debate if nothing else. From accusations that politicians are limiting the public dialog with the scientists to articles that provide dissenting opinions. I have personaly seen media broadcasts that show scientists that pulled out of the IPCC group disagreeing with the conclusions reached by this same organization.
    The arrogance of Al Gore to take a private plane to a climate change rally is enough to make me doubt his motivations.
    Lets get all our answers settled before we start passing legislation and hopping on the global restrictions cash cow.
    There is documented evedence of other periods of "warming" as evidenced by data from the midevil period and ancient mapping of the arctic coastline that could only have occured with much less ice. But here we are screaming that the world is coming to an end based upon less than 50ppm of CO2.
    Its a bunch of BS...

    The Debate has not be settled.

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/03/17/60minutes/main1415985.shtml

    http://www.parabolicarc.com/2009/12/06/nasa-climate-scientist-guilty-contract-fraud/

    http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/financialpost/story.html?id=c47c1209-233b-412c-b6d1-5c755457a8af

    ReplyDelete