If this was supposed to be a debate then don’t you need an opposing point of view instead of “groupthink”?

The Pew Organization (an offshoot of Enron) are well known for their absolute belief in global warming. Michael Zimmer is a big energy lawyer who is mainly interested in obtaining the biggest financial gains from “cap and trade” legislation for any of his clients. Jesse Jenkins is among thousands of Global Warming bloggers that rush to denigrate any sign of a “denier”.

As far as I know none of these three have a science background at all.

Next time, if you wish for a real debate, I suggest inviting Dr. Fred Singer and Dr. Craig Idso, the authors of “Climate Change Reconsidered: The Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change”.

These two men are well known scientists. Dr Singer is internationally known for his work on energy and environmental issues. He is a pioneer in the the development of rocket and satellite technology and devised the basic instrument for measuring stratospheric ozone. He holds the office of Professor emeritus of environmental science at the University of Virginia. He held many high ranking Government Positions from 1953 through 1989 and received numerous awards from the White House and the Department of Commerce.

Dr. Idso holds a PhD in Geography from Arizona State University and lectures extensively on metereology and physical geography.

What I am calling for is a more science based debate with opposing points of view and without political, legal or business representation. Only then will you gain credence with me and those who, like me, take the time to really research this issue – not just believe the political hype or advertising at face value. Always presented without any facts to back them up.

There are many of us and I will be working extremely hard to ensure that there are many more as time proceeds.

Thank you
Bazz Rich

thanks,

dan

You write:

“If you doubt it, read Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States, an excellent report, written in plain English, about the likely impacts of climate change. Catastrophe is probably not too strong a word to describe the environmental impact of business as usual.”

As you know, I am a big fan of yours……….but to say that a change in climate would be harmful to every geographical section of a country that ranges from Alaska to Florida….my goodness.

I think we should reduce greenhouse gases, but these doomsday scenarios have the impact of increasing the number of skeptics. After reading the aforementioned publication, I can only conclude that global warming will cause the elimination of rain.

Stuart