Originally posted by utherpendragon
In addition, if AGW is real (and, let's face it, it probably is)-sh76
Lets face it sh76, its probably not! i dont understand why you always got to straddle the fence and never want to rock the boat.
I specifically recall on more than one occasion you saying it was a farce. Take a stand man! stop being so wishy washy.
I never ever said AGW was a farce. I think you're confusing my attitude towards the Kyoto accord and the Copenhagen conference with the underlying issue that those discussions deal with. The fact that some liberals overplay the AGW card and use it as a means to promote global wealth redistribution does not mean that it's not real. And the fact that the West's attempts to deal with AGW have been inconsistent, ineffective and, on the whole, incompetent, likewise does not impact the validity of the problem.
I don't know for certain whether AGW is real. But GW is clearly real (even if possibly cyclical) the weight of the scientific community seems to think that humankind has a significant role in it. I have a friend who is a professor of environmental studies at CCNY. I've quizzed him at length on this issue. He's no liberal, he'd very understated and has no agenda here; but he consistently maintains that the current GW trend is probably at least partially caused by man.
I read the climategate emails and no, I don't for a minute buy the explanation that all those damning sounding emails were really just scientific points not fully understandable to the layman. But again, the fact that some take it too far for political purposes does not impeach the idea itself.
I have no problem with rocking the boat. But I'm not going to disagree just for the sake of disagreeing with no reason to do so.
In any case, I thought that urging scientists to spend less time playing up AGW and more time searching for alternative solutions was a stand.