|
|
Blog Feeds
Anti-Empire
The SakerA bird's eye view of the vineyard
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandPromoting Human Rights in Ireland |
Insidious Climate Change Denial: Do You Have ICCD? international |
environment |
other press
 Sunday July 11, 2010 22:03 by Bill Henderson
 Bill Henderson writes about those who deny climate change and he also touchs on some other hot topics. But there is another class of deniers that must be overcome if we are to successfully mitigate climate change: those that do know that climate change is happening, do know the GHG cause and effect, and do recognize the spectrum of climate change dangers, but refuse to recognize that mitigation of a scale necessary is not possible within the presently configured socio-economy (developed world/global). This widespread denial keeps us telling ourselves carbon addict lies like putting a price on carbon or growing a green economy or clean coal or saving the planet by being a smart shopper as climate change solutions. |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (3 of 3)
Jump To Comment: 3 2 1The graph at this link shows an impending catastrophe.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Mauna_Loa_Carbon_Diox...n.svg
(The little wiggles are caused by differences in plant respiration in the Northern Hemisphere between summer and winter.)
The graph is all too accurate.
Unfortunately.
Are you saying climate change is not happening, BJ? Or that human activity has no input?Or that the general scientific community and the UN are in collusion to undermine 'our way of life'?
Nuts, dangerous nuts...is not the best sign off if you are telling others to sharpen their scientific focus.
Should I just leave the engine running in the driveway in the meantime?As a protest against all that alarmism.
Insidious Climate Change Denier? Is that what I am? For daring not to 'believe' in 'Climate Change' as currently presented we are to be labelled with the most insidious names. Why doesnt Mr Henderson instead try to argue his 'scientific' case if he has one? Why would a person with science on their side resort to writing bile filled articles without one scientific justification for the imposition of life changing laws on the entire world?
His contention that 97 percent to 98 percent of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenet that combustion of fossil fuels is the source of global climate change lacks crediblity considering the source and the affiliations of the autors.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107...tract
Between calling people who disagree with him names and justifying his position by citing dubious sources he talks about "100% emission reduction possible by 2020." I'm not sure if we should laugh at that figure or be scared by it. In my opinion these Climate Believers are nuts; dangerous nuts!