Friday, November 2, 2007

Scientist Busts Al

This was a good article on Townhall.com.

It basically mentioned, that hey, guess what, there were actual scientists who also won the Nobel Prize this year, besides that idiot, Al Gore.

Here's an excerpt from an interview with Nobel winner John Cristy, a member of both the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and director of the University of Alabama's Earth System Science Center:

Miles O'Brien: I assume you're not happy about sharing this award with Al Gore. You going to renounce it in some way?

John Christy: Well, as a scientist at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, I always thought that - I may sound like the Grinch who stole Christmas here - that prizes were given for performance, and not for promotional activities. And, when I look at the world, I see that the carbon dioxide rate is increasing, and energy demand, of course, is increasing. And that's because, without energy, life is brutal and short. So, I don't see very much effect in trying to scare people into not using energy, when it is the very basis of how we can live in our society.

O'Brien: So, what about the movie ("An Inconvenient Truth") do you take issue with, then, Dr. Christy?

Christy: Well, there's any number of things. I suppose, fundamentally, it's the fact that someone is speaking about a science that I have been very heavily involved with and have labored so hard in, and been humiliated by, in the sense that the climate is so difficult to understand, Mother Nature is so complex, and so the uncertainties are great, and then to hear someone speak with such certainty and such confidence about what the climate is going to do is - well, I suppose I could be kind and say, it's annoying to me.

O'Brien: But you just got through saying that the carbon dioxide levels are up. Temperatures are going up. There is a certain degree of certainty that goes along with that, right?

Christy: Well, the carbon dioxide is going up. And remember that carbon dioxide is plant food in the fundamental sense. All of life depends on the fact carbon dioxide is in the atmosphere. So, we're fortunate it's not a toxic gas. But, on the other hand, what is the climate doing? And when we build - and I'm one of the few people in the world that actually builds these climate data sets - we don't see the catastrophic changes that are being promoted all over the place. For example, I suppose CNN did not announce two weeks ago when the Antarctic sea ice extent reached its all-time maximum, even though, in the Arctic in the North Pole, it reached its all-time minimum.
And so heretically on. There are others like Dr. Christy out there in the scientific community who don't believe the best way to approach science is in a panic.

"Heretically on" indeed. People are so concerned with spouting their politically correct garbage blahblahblah about the environment, that they don't realize how many good scientists don't believe there is enough evidence to support the whole global warming theory at all. The science is actually pretty ambiguous on both sides of the coin. And that, Al baby, is an inconvenient truth.

So sorry to disappoint, Al, but you got trumped on this one by an actual man of science, not propaganda. But don't worry. I'm sure you will still be able to go on Oprah.

No comments: