Ought Doesn’t Mean Should or Must

Hey, Stupidaker, notice how warm it’s getting? I guess reading all the AlGore Kool-aid press releases and worrying about whether the folks I read about fall within your reading list doesn’t help WHEN IT IS COLD AS HE** ALL OVER THE WORLD. I know you and your fellow experts will say it isn’t really cold(er). I urge you to go stand on a street corner in downtown Chicago without your clothes like the emperor you so faithfully follow. Then you’ll all freeze to death and logic will return.

dswx-I am sure that we are all thankful for your suggestion that we read the much touted IPCC report. For my own part I certainly have read it. More than once. And that is precisely WHY I do not support the current global warming/climate change theories.
The IPCC is an agency that merely surveys, compiles and PUBLISHES the works of scientists in the various disciplines. As far as “peer review” stands, there is a saying in the scientific community that dtates “peer review is just another name for “peer pressure.“ It does seem odd that there are no dissenting reports in the IPCC report.
This is not the forum for hard science there are many web sites where that angle is argued and debated endlessly. Yes sir, debated. With matching charts and graphs and the ever changing stats.
The IPCC has become a closed circuit with contributing scientists competing for the $50 billion in grant money offered by the pro global warming community.
A few elementary facts. All of the data compiled is eventually fed into 30 or so “computer models” operated by software engineers.
The original “predictions” on which all subsequent data is compiled failed to take water vapor into consideration, which of course was a huge omission. The report still does not include “reliable” information on aerasols or clouds. Simply because they know almost nothing about those.
Solar activity is also “sketchy.“ There is no “backcasting” and the “hockey stick” went the way of the horse and buggy.
And very importantly. Global warming as it was known stopped in 1998. The CO2 levels have kept rising. Why?
Because the very basic elememt of this
theory is incorrect. CO2 FOLLOWED the globe out of the ice age! Did not PRECEDE it.
CO2 levels always rise after the warming.
In the meantime the real drastic,obscene problems of pollution and over population are being ignored
while governments dither over the non-existant GW scam. The latest debacle in Poland exhibited how desperate the Europeans are not to let go of this cash cow. Goe-engineering was big. Hang on to your wallet. They are going to go to Copenhagen with a large bill for America to endorse.

Again, the scientific debate is long over.  Read the IPPC peer-reviewed reports by *clinate* scientists.  Scientific debate occurs in peer-reviewed scientific journals and conferences.  It’s called the “scientific method” (which has been followed for many centuries), something most people should have learned in high school.  It does not occur on the pages of a newspaper, a web blog, a Senator’s illogical web site, or a magazine.  There is simply no excuse for failing to try to learn about science.  Or for assuming just because you read or heard something you liked or believed in, it must be true even though it has no scientific basis.

In the 1980s solar panels that had been on the White House roof were removed; and, in what will come to be known as the greatest strategic blunder—economic, military and geopolitical—in human history, federal policies defining a sustainable 21st century economy and liberating Americans from Mideast oil were dismantled. Gone were research grants for new energy sources, and tax breaks for work-a-day Americans investing in efficiencies for their homes and businesses; leaving, by default, a policy of tax-funded programs subsidizing production and consumption of oil.
For the benefit of Big Oil, we Americans support brutal Petro-Tyrannies; spend lives and limbs of our young troops and that of uncounted civilian innocents in foreign lands. We stifle science, ignore reason, dumb ourselves down, affirm irresponsibility (corporate & personal) as expressions of Liberty, and squander our children’s birthright as we worship impotent gods of noise and steel and speed, chanting in unison the Sacred Contradiction: “COUNTRY FIRST…DRILL! DRILL! DRILL!”
We have lost 30 years of scientific, technical & economic progress spinning our wheels and paying taxes on behalf of Big Oil.
We are fortunate to live in a nation where we are given the PRIVILEGE & RESPONSIBILITY to vote.  But, if enough American citizens choose to remain in stubborn ignorance & to wallow in the POLITICALLY CORRECT LIFESTYLE OF WHINING & CRYING that right-wing INFOTAINERS and petro-chemical lobbyists has chosen for them, we very well could lose another 30 years while the rest of the world moves ahead. What a pity!

*Climate* scientists, sport.  Not “PhDs” in fields that have nothing to do with climate.  Simply regurgitating what someone told you to think or say does nothing to further the point.  Again, read the science.  And learn what the scientific method is all about.  The science behind global warming research follows the scientific method: Hypotheses, data collection, repeatable experiments, peer-review, new hypotheses.  That is the way science has always been done and always will be done.  Not through newspaper articles, editorials, internet websites or Congressional press releases.  BTW, if you had read any of the global warming research conducted by climate scientists you would know they are all PhDs…in climate science.  And they have been extensively peer-reviewed.  Sorry, the scientific debate is long over.  Done.  Finis.  End of story.  The idea that you or any other denialist thinks they know more than literally thousands of peer-reviewed climate scientists around the world is the definition of pure arrogance.  And scientific illiteracy.  There is no excuse for failing to try to learn about science and how science is conducted (hint: not through popularity polls).  Or reading the actual results.