"The Debate's Over!" (....er....or didn't happen)
All the newspaper headlines last week were more than happy to declare that 2006 was the warmest year for the U.S. but this week, it has been cold out here in Los Angeles; and I wouldn't mind experiencing some of that global warming, right about now.
The debate seems to be heating up again (and also cooling down over in Denmark, as Al Gore backed out of debating Bjorn Lomborg on Gore's favorite topic of interest: global warming. I guess he only loves talking about it, when he can proclaim "the debate's over", and not get challenged on it). As reported by Noel Sheppard at Newsbusters:
A prominent climatologist working for The Weather Channel has suggested that on air meteorologists be stripped of their credentials if they express any skepticism concerning global climate change. Think I’m kidding? Read the following from the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works blog: ‘The Weather Channel’s (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program ‘The Climate Code,’ is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their ‘Seal of Approval’ for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe."
Why is it that liberals have the reputation for being the champions of free speech; yet appear to be the ones who can't handle divergent opinions very well, and work actively toward shutting down open debate? This happens all over the country on University campuses where conservative voices are shouted down and not tolerated by liberal students and faculty; and it's happening in Memphis, which held the National Conference for Media Reform. I hope to blog about that misguided exercise in the restriction of free speech while claiming to want the opposite.
Labels: global warming
posted by The WordSmith from Nantucket at 1/19/2007 10:41:00 PM
4 Comments:
I've decided the libs only believe in free speech for themselves, Wordsmith, which means they think themselves to be the only ones who have a right to say what they think. I'm not at all surprised that a moonbat climatologist would suggest such a thing, nor would I be surprised if most liberals think it a great idea. We can be assured Al Gore will be for it!
These people's thought processes are totally alien to me.
Weather patterns shift, it is nature of weather. Global warming to SOME degree is a part of those natural shifts. Frozen fruit in California... now how did that happen if it was GLOBAL warming? It can't.
But people like to embrace false-beliefs for some reason. Profound grasps of ignorance packaged as facts do not change the reality that ignorance is all that is packaged.
And you know Robert Redford and the Hollywood crowd have been warning of a "chill wind" in America clamping down on left wing dissent.
So how do they explain the weather channel bimbos efforts to decertify, which would mean FIRING, any meteorological person who fails to agree with her point of view?
You know why Gore didn't want to debate Lomborg? It's because of Lomborg's study that world leaders and economists when presented with a need to prioritize spending on the world's problems always rank Global Baloney at the bottom.
Global Baloney is nothing more than a SMOKESCREEN to enshrine socialist principles over the free distribution of wealth via the control of energy.
It would cripple Western economies while exempting one third of the world's population.
The solution put forward by Gore and company would solve no problems and quite possibly create new ones.
We can't reliably forecast the weather past a few days. What makes anyone think they can forecast global climate change 20 or 30 years from now?
The global baloney hysterics gloom and doom scenarios in past decades have ALL proved false. Their current scare is just the lastest attempt to try again.
hey Word...well everyones comparing the weather these days.lol..where is the scientific consistency and evidence and btw..its freeeeeeeeeeezing in NYC!,,:)
Post a Comment
<< Home