landscaper said:
The climate change phrasing came about when some of the global warming mantras started to fall apart . The global warming became climate change when temperatures id not rise as expected, the hockey stick temperature graph could not be replicated and several others were brought into question.
The phrase 90% of the worlds scientists believe in climate change is a misnomer .
There is about a 50-50 split in the serious scientists who study the climate. Dr Suzuki is not one of them his discipline is I believe botony although I could by wrong with the specialty.
The climatologist who started the weather network vehimently derides climate change and the latest ocean studies by the Argus Buoys shows a net drop in ocean temperature.
What i believe all this says is why don't we find out what is really going on before we jump up to correct the problem. We want to get the correct problem.
That said not dumping large amounts of theings into our environment is a good thing to do regardless of the climate change implications.
Exactly right.
The stupid thing about this perpetual debate is that practically everyone agrees that we ought to reduce the level of pollution released into the atmosphere (and elsewhere). However, instead of proceeding from that point where there is little dissent, all progress on pollution control gets bogged down in the "global warming" argument.
It certainly appears that the debate is being pushed by people like Suzuki and Gore whose personal reputations are now too heavy invested in "being right" about 1) whether global warming is occuring, and, if so 2) whether man-made emissions are either principally or significantly responsible for global warming.
I also find the "90% of scientists" argument, even if that argument were factually sound, to be unhelpful. Science is not democratic. Many scientific concepts that become generally accepted start off being seen as "radical". Scientific theories are not dismissed or adopted by a show of hands, but rather by persuasive research. Similarly, as a member of the general public, I'll be persuaded by the most persuasive scientific position on the topic, not by whether 85% of Botanists, 46.5% of Graduate Students, or 91% of people with science degrees earning less that $60,000 per year agree or disagree with that position.
