Quote:
Originally Posted by Flames Draft Watcher
Interesting. I found Ball's piece particularly poorly written and defended for the level he claims to have achieved.
I think if there was a massive swell of scientists who have credible information against global warming both politicians and industry would be falling all over themselves to hype it and promote it. Worrying about climate change is pricey and involves making political decisions that likely won't be popular. That our media and politicians are slowly coming to a consensus on this issue points to there being a lot of evidence on the side of climate change.
Op-ed pieces like this certainly aren't going to sway my opinion. Why wasn't there a summit on the myths of global warming just recently? Why did scientists get together themselves to talk about this issue if it was not well supported by their own method?
|
Well said; I completely agree. I came into this thread late, but I too found the linked article to be poorly written and completely devoid of factual evidence to support his claims. It was a rhetorical piece and nothing else, which is particularly precious as that was part of what he was railing against in his piece.
It was further illuminating to discover his "credentials" are misrepresented severely.