Posted by: Winslie Gomez | 13/03/2007

Global Warming Debate: What are we to make of it?

“A source at Channel 4 said: “It is essentially a polemic and we are expecting it to cause trouble, but this is the controversial programming that Channel 4 is renowned for.”Controversial director Martin Durkin said: “You can see the problems with the science of global warming, but people just don’t believe you – it’s taken 10 years to get this commissioned.”I think it will go down in history as the first chapter in a new era of the relationship between scientists and society. Legitimate scientists – people with qualifications – are the bad guys.”It is a big story that is going to cause controversy. “
Courtesy of http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story
Interesting post

Reasic

Has some good observations, he makes 12 interesting points and for objectivity, we need to make up our own mind.

http://reasic.wordpress.com/2007/03/10/the-great-global-warming-swindle-questions-answered/#comment-348

Another post that deals with one specific scientist -Carl Wunsch

Sunrise: According to Ch4

we should fear it!

Swindlers “ One of the scientists featured in the film is Carl Wunsch, a highly regarded paleoceanographer at MIT. His statements in the film imply that CO2 from natural processes dwarfs that from human emissions — with the clear implication that human activity has a negligible impact on atmospheric CO2.Wunsch was quoted out of context, and he’s very unhappy about it.

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2007/03/12/swindlers/#comment-764

The letter to WagTV by Carl Wunsch is complete in the link to the post

Advertisements

Responses

  1. Thanks for the link, justlearningman. I would be glad to help if there’s anything I can provide some insights on.

  2. Thanks Reisic. Only giving credit, where credit is due.

    Your post is trying to be objective and should be encouraged by everyone interested in this debate. You also willingly admit the bits you are not sure of and that too is to be admired.

    This is a topic that impinges every facet of our existence and our future development. What we don’t need is the polemic preacher who will be quick to jump on this bandwagon to get their own voice heard for its own sake and screaming the new gospel of hell & damnation to come or peddling their own brand of redemption regardless of its age or universal acceptance.

    Fanaticism breeds in the fallopian tube of ignorance.

  3. Sorry and very sorry got REASIC wrong!

    oops!

  4. It’s alright. 😛

    Yeah, I’m just learning as I go, too, but I’ve been learning about this for a while now, so I feel somewhat comfortable blogging about it. I’m definitely no climate scientist, but I know enough to be able to see through many of the skeptical arguments. So far, it seems to me that the majority of these are just attempts to create confusion, rather than attempts to come to a mutual understanding.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: