Washington, D.C., 6 June 2010 — I’m offering a challenge and opportunity to those of you who believe that the science of global warming is settled: take a look at an informed contrary view.
Happer was appearing, along with physicist Roger Cohen, a prominent activist among the fellows of the American Physical Society, at a Washington meeting sponsored by the Marshall Institute, long a cool-bed of climate skepticism. I attended, and it was a far-ranging and intellectually meaty meeting.
Now, a video of that event is available from the Marshall Society. Regardless of your views on the climate, this is worth spending 82 minutes of your time. And I’d particularly like to hear from those in the tank for the alarmists. But if you do want to comment, here’s a basic rule: no personal attacks. Make an ad hominem attack, and your posting won’t see the light of day on this blog.
While I’m in the link mode, here are some other recent posts on other sites you may find interesting, informative, or amusing:
* Mark Mills, a veteran conservative energy gadfly and intellectual provocateur, has a fine article on smart grid issues in Forbes magazine.
* David Archibald, Aussie geologist and solar cycle expert, on “Why scientists get it wrong” in Australia’s Quadrant magazine.
* Economist Robert Michaels in Rob Bradley’s MasterResource blog does a thorough, well-deserved trashing of a recent U.S. Chamber of Commerce report on energy security.
Good reading.
Nice commented Ken, but what worries me more than the changing climate (at which we have no influence), is, if the climate scientists are but setting up a new “standard” for scientific work in general!
Climate science is fraudulent, global warming is only promoted by 30 scientists, they are just in it for the money. Did we really have to sit through 82 minutes just to hear denialist’s beliefs stated over and over?
I’d suggest that you look into some of the ‘facts’ cited. For example Cohen told you that the Argo data shows the oceans are cooling. It’s easy enough to look that up for yourself. He goes on and on about the supposed fraud in climate science, then he lies to you.