As temperatures flatline, cold records outnumber warm ones in the US in mid-summer, the Arctic fills up with ice again with a record breaking rebound from the record low of 2012 and as the Antarctic ice sheet continues to expand reaching a near record for mid-August (2013) the CAGW apologists in the US have united in a press peeve against the CAGW ‘deniers’. Is there an IPCC report due out? Their foremost tactics are the use of ad hominems and brushing aside debate invitations with the belittling science is settled (SISie defense) so why debate mantra. If either of these tactics were advanced as a valid argument on a logic exam the ‘X’ on the test should not be a surprise.
Boxer, through her office, said she wouldn’t debate what was already settled, comparing the connection between global warming and climate change to the long-established link between smoking and cancer.
Same from Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz:
This, of course, is a cop out. If it is so easy to prove that human induced CO2 is the cause of climate change then have a public televised debate and you should win handily. Why wouldn’t you be eager to silence your critics with the data unless you don’t have the data?
Alarmists run and hide because they know the weakness of their arguments would be exposed to the data of the real world. Better to remain silent and be thought stupid than to open one’s mouth and prove it. But they take the high road of superior knowledge and claim that which isn’t true.They do this because it was never about the science and always about the power and control that will accrue to the politicos when resource use is under their guidance. We would all scream bloody murder if a private company were to control access to all resources but when the government has the key this is OK?
Recently, Al Gore has been an active name caller and Arnie has the final solution while Ted Turner is afraid that CO2 is the final solution.
Name calling is a schoolyard bullying tactic. It is actions like these that arouse suspicions that maybe the case for CAGW lacks evidence or it would be emphasized. The way to deal with your opposition is to acknowledge what they say and then to present your evidence as to why they are wrong. Trying to link skeptics to creationism, tobacco smoke causes cancer deniers, alcoholics, flat earthers, misinformers, fossil fuel funded shills, racism, homophobic bias and pro slavery is to try to demonize skeptics with guilt by association. No evidence. All innuendo. All misinformation. The alarmist case is so weak that they must demean, misdirect, put down and make outrageous statements for the press. Is this how they intend to “win the conversation” against deniers who are “melting away”.
If the facts that Gore presented were actually true there would be no need for the name calling or guilt by association. One suspects that Gore knows that his facts are not true and can be countered easily by a well informed skeptic. He claims that storms are more intense and ‘they’ are going to add a category ‘6’ for hurricanes. Really? The data don’t support that assertion. This is why Gore won’t debate. He demeans himself and his case by maintaining falsehoods. No one will take you seriously if you make statements that are easily shown to be at odds with reality.
His wild allegations are entertaining for the media and he seems to have no compunctions about making a fool of himself. The more influence he has the further behind he sets climate science and the more damage he does to both science and the economy. And the more money he pockets. After all, for snake oil salesmen it is all about the money.
Perhaps we can count on Gore to continue the hot air to keep us warm this winter since CO2 failed to do that last winter. Hot summer 2012. Lots of triple digit temperatures. Remember? Cold snowy winter and spring 2012-13. Where did the heat go? Hole in the CO2 blanket? CO2 gone south for the winter?
The tactical blitz has bombed. As the failure of the IPCC model predictions become more obvious more people are willing to stand up and say so.
No comments:
Post a Comment