The most significant thing in the film, the thing that anyone who is a Trader can understand, is... Since the point where investigation of Global Warming began, the number of jobs for climatologists increased TEN TIMES. So, 90% of climatologists chose that career in order to get jobs in Global Warming. What is the chance that those people are going to say "Please make me unemployed because there really is no man-made Global Warming". Regardless of the scientific facts, there is zero chance they are going to say that. Ironically, all the Global Warming adherents open themselves to this argument every time they say "all deniers must be being paid by the oil companies". If they are saying that income and employment is overiding the science for the scientists who are "deniers", then certainly the same must be true for the scientists who are "believers" - the same human nature is present in both cases. So, the Global Warming Adherents are themselves removing the entire scientific basis for their viewpoint by claiming that scientists' personal conflicts of interest must be taken into account. All climatologists have an automatic conflict of interest...
Here's an article from last year: http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2006/2005GL025539.shtml 25%-35% over the last 25 years is the estimate that's attributable to solar warming in the paper... That's a lot of global warming that isn't attributable to solar effects.
I'd have to agree with you here. Global warming or not, there are plenty of other good reasons to conserve energy, carpool, etc... -mnx
Congratulations on a most propitious victory. How unfortunate, however, that you should find yourself on the wrong court, holding a hockey stick.
yeah, no much of an incentive for any scientist to question gW and that's one of the big problem with this whole affair.
Why not? Many of the same lobbyists and "scientists" who denied a direct relationship between smoking and cancer are now the principal detractors of either the existence or cause of global warming.
Dude, Researchers have been funded by oil companies for years to disprove the theory and have failed. It's been peer reviewed to death by the scientific community and, based on our knowledge today, there actually is a general consensus about the matter. I really don't follow what you are pushing here. What's your strategy -- wait and see?