But we've got to do SOMETHING!! Animals are being extincticated by the ton every DAY!! The penguins are even making their own documentary about it. No it's TRUE!! I saw a pre-view on TV.

Somebody turn the sun down a little; maybe that will help

Shorter Will Franklin: 'The media doesn't devote enough time to creationism.'

I have read Will's article a couple times now, and I still can't find the word 'creationism' in it anywhere.

Oh, that must be Jadegold's reading comprehension problem yet again.

Looks like I have to 'splain to Ken.

The thrust of Will's article is the media doesn't sufficiently present both sides of the global warming argument.

Of course, the reality is that global warming is a scientifically-established fact. Therefore, presenting 'the other side' would entail the media having to present myths and lies.

It's akin to the evolution argument; there are those (rightwingers, to be sure) who believe evolution is just so much hokum and the bible is really the true story.

Will's message is that we're paying far too much attention to this science stuff and we really need to balance it with some good old mythsand superstitions.

Science has not established that man has caused global warming Jadgegold, as you well know.

Therefore, the MSM promoting Gore's hysterical chicken little view of global warming without giving air time to opposing views is not only one-sided, it is completely unscientific.

Come on Jadegold, you will have to do a little better than this. Merely pronouncing that 'global warming is a fact' is only the beginning of the debate, not the end of it. You must also make the case that it is anthropogenic before you can justify radical measures to counter it.

I'm still waiting from last time to see if jadegold can even articulate the point of view he is attacking. My sniff of your comment indicates you can't get it right. Maybe Ken's hint will help.

Global Warming, a fact, if you are one to observe short-term temperature measurement as a cursor to indicate a trend.

The cause, Hell, who knows, there have been so many temperature variations in the last 2000 years that I don't know whether to stock my closet for the beach or for a trip to the higher Alps.

Did the humans cause this anomaly, which has been part of our history, or has this been fabricated to provide far-left social activist another reason to control our lives.

No doubt in my mind, if I were a scientist of pre-disposed political inclinations and a very poor interpretative skill, I would probably opt for the easy track, and go after government funding to prove we are the ones put here to destroy the earth.

After all, a big SUV rolling down the highway, while you observe in your Yugo, provides a more convenient answer than simple education and logic.

Excess is bad, emotional dysfunction becomes logic, hatred becomes reason, and you latch on like a hungry bass in a shallow pond. The values and reasoning held as staples to the left.

The point of the post was not creationism, mythology, nor the variations of temperature on the earth, but the overwhelming bias (and corresponding inability to research and ask questions) of the national news organizations.

It's as if are being lectured to by hysterical, 9-year old girl drama queens. "But the POLAR BEARS, daddy! The North Pole is MELLLLLLTIIINGGG!!!!"

Why is the bias so ever-present and so strong? As Eneils Bailey noted: "...emotional dysfunction becomes logic, hatred becomes reason..."

Dan Patterson

Science has not established that man has caused global warming Jadgegold, as you well know.

In fact, science has.

US EPA:

In a 268-page report submitted to the United Nations, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) endorsed what many scientists have long argued - that human activities such as oil refining, power generation and car emissions are significant causes of global warming.

More Science:

Mankind is to blame for global warming, the world's top climate scientists said on Friday, sending governments a "crystal clear" warning they must take urgent action to avert damage that could last centuries.

National Academy of Sciences:

Humans have had an impact on climate. In May 2001, the White House asked the National Academy of Sciences to assess our current understanding of climate change by answering several key questions related to the causes of climate change, projections of future change, and critical research directions to improve understanding of climate change. Climate Change Science: An Analysis of Some Key Questions responded directly to those questions. The report’s often-cited conclusion is that “changes observed over the last several decades are likely mostly due to human activities” with some contribution from natural variability.

Denial is a symptom of creationism.

Well, that was entertaining. The NAS report finds it "plausible" that global warming COULD increase. This is based mainly on Mann's infamous "hockey stick" graph. Dr. Mann is an associate professor at Penn State. His methodology for his graph is not available, therefore his findings cannot be independently studied.

They found a 0.6 degree increase in mean temperature in the last few decades. There have been several periods of greater change, although the data from the past several hundred years is not particularly rigorous.

Based on this mild increase, Mann has posited that we will face a severe increase in mean temperature. This is a hypothesis, based on his findings, which are not currently verifiable, since he refuses to release his data.

The BBC article had an egregious error in it, stating that Bush walked away from the Kyoto Accord, which is ridiculous. In 1997 the U.S. Senate walked away from the accord. Bush just made it official. If they got that wrong, why should I believe anything in the article, which contains nothing but the leaked summary of the U.N. report, which was assembled by bureaucrats, and has since seen many of the scientists involved in the actual report distance themselves from the political pronouncements in the summary.

Who cares what the EPA finds, as it is a large bureaucracy that sees an opportunity to increase its reach and clout.

Shorter Chris: Don't distract me with science, I have myths.

Other silliness from Chris:

This is based mainly on Mann's infamous "hockey stick" graph. Dr. Mann is an associate professor at Penn State. His methodology for his graph is not available, therefore his findings cannot be independently studied.

Google is your friend, Chris:

All of the proxy data (tree-rings, coral, ice cores, and historical documents) used in Mann et al. (1998) has been available since May 2000 on
this public website: ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/MBH98. The
methodology used by my colleagues and me is described in detail in the initial publication, and further expanded upon in July 2004 on Nature�s supplementary website
(http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v430/n6995/suppinfo/nature02478.html)
and on our own website, ftp://holocene.evsc.virginia.edu/pub/MANNETAL98.
Moreover, independently-derived source codes for implementing our algorithm, and all required input data, have been posted on the website of the National Center for Atmospheric Research. See
http://www.ucar.edu/ccr/ammann/millennium/CODES_MBH.html. For these reasons, charges that our work is not subject to replication are unfounded. The
initial description of the work was sufficient to permit researchers to independently produce the key algorithms. See, e.g., Zorita, E., F. Gonzalez-Rouco, and S. Legutke, Testing the Mann et al.(1998) approach to paleoclimate reconstructions in the context of a 1000-yr control simulation with the ECHO-G Coupled Climate Model, J. Climate, 16, 1378-1390 (2003); Von Storch, H., E. Zorita, J.M. Jones, Y. Dimitriev, F. Gonzalez-Rouco, F., and S.F.B. Tett, Reconstructing Past Climate from Noisy Data, Science, 306, 679-682 (2004). Not only have we replicated our results with a different methodology (Rutherford, S., Mann, M.E., Osborn, T.J., Bradley, R.S., Briffa, K.R., Hughes,
M.K., Jones, P.D., Proxy-based Northern Hemisphere Surface Temperature Reconstructions: Sensitivity to Methodology, Predictor Network, Target Season
and Target Domain, Journal of Climate (2005) (to appear in July issue), but an independent group has replicated our original methods and results (See Wahl, E.R. and Ammann, C.M., Robustness of the Mann, Bradley, Hughes Reconstruction of Surface Temperatures: Examination of Criticisms Based on the Nature and Processing of Proxy Climate Evidence, Climatic Change (2005)

More:

Who cares what the EPA finds, as it is a large bureaucracy that sees an opportunity to increase its reach and clout.

Apparently, Chris believes scientists like Sean Hannity.

"Apparently, Chris believes scientists like Sean Hannity."

Yeah, I know what you mean, I believe scientists like Algore.

As with the internet, Algore invented man-made global warming.

One of the great inventors of this century, what a man(?).