A Professor seeks Balance in the Global Warming Debate
A professor at ERAU used a week of classes to debate the whole aspect of manmade global warming. During this week he showed Al Gore’s Inconvenient truth, and The Great Global Warming Swindle.
One student said:
“After watching ‘An Inconvenient Truth,’ I was relatively convinced,” Shipley said one day last month in class. “(Al Gore) did a good job in presenting his points very methodically one after the other. They all build up to essentially prove his point.
“After watching ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle,’ my thinking completely changed,” he said. “I kind of did a complete flip-flop.”
That’s what happens when you show both sides of the story, it opens up debate. They problem is that the debate is being stifled on this issue. It’s being stifled for political reasons, carbon emission tax revenue we will be forced to pay and broad government restrictions. We keep hearing the debate is over even though there hasn’t been debate. We hear the science has been settled, that their are a consensus of scientists behind the global warming science.If scientists just have a consensus than it’s not proven fact.
“I fear that attempts are being made to purposefully subvert the public understanding of the nature of science in order to achieve political goals,” he wrote in an e-mail. “Science is not about consensus, and to invoke this raises the hackles of scientists such as myself. The lure of politics and publicity is no doubt seductive, but it nevertheless amazes me that so many scientists have jumped on the bandwagon of consensus science, apparently forgetting or ignoring the sad history of consensus science.”
All you need to do is look at who is pushing this global warming agenda, a politician- Al Gore. That should tell you all you need to know.
The truths of global warming are, if not inconvenient, incomprehensible, Wanliss argues.
“The atmosphere is incredibly complicated, and we know very little about it,” he said. “We are studying a system which is so big . . . we don’t know what all the variables are.”
We don’t fully understand the world we line in, yet we know we are destroying it? How can this be?
That’s what consensus is, a theory not a fact. Until we understand how our world functions we cannot possible know if we are hurting it.
America's Watchtower 
I dedicate the following rework of “The Lord’s Prayer” to Al Gore and the rest of his liberal carbon crusaders.
The Gore’s Prayer
Al Father, who art in transit,
Phony be thy game.
Thy Lear-Jet hums.
Those lies you’ve spun,
About Earth, and your huge mansion.
Give us a break, your daily dread.
And forgive us with bus passes,
As we curse those flying first-class above us.
And lead us not into stagflation,
But humor us more, Sir Carbon-Knievel.
Amen!
LikeLike
Last I checked Mr. Gore was no longer in the public sphere as a politician (since the year 2000 by my count)–you may want to check your facts!! It is funny to hear so many critics attacking Mr. Gore in a personal matter about what has been presented in a very clear and concise manner. Very cute and might i say–cheezy–to mock the Lord’s Prayer with such a personal attack.
I have seen no facts in your argument that suggest that CO2 and climate temperatures have no direct correlation–one of the key point in Mr. Gore presentation. In fact there are no scientific arguments against this fact or against the fact that have been presented by any credible scientists. Furthermore, there have been no credible arguments against the fact that the planet is warming and the affects are being seen all over the globe–and that the level of C02 in the athmosphere has risen in the last 100 years from 250ppm to 380ppm?
So please tell me if I am to read your blog and gather some sense of the debate you are proposing–please tell what, other than our continued burning of massive quantities of fossil fuel, is causing this preciptious rise in C02 in the athmosphere? I do not see massive eruptions of volcanos or other event that could contribute to such a rise?
LikeLike
I’m still surprised nobody’s willing to talk about the “Heartland 500” list.
Are so-called “skeptics” actually in Al Gore’s pocket?
— bi, International Journal of Inactivism
LikeLike