Climate Consensus or Con?
by Rich Trzupek, FrontPage:
The climate change proponents weren’t able to enter any scientific facts that supported their position into evidence. McGlone, Whitty and Mason all pointed toward “scientific consensus” regarding climate change as “proof” that global warming is a problem that requires emergency action. At one point, Lord Whitty declared that 95% of scientists agree that mankind’s influence on the climate would result in catastrophe if left unchecked. Challenged by Monckton to offer evidence of this assertion, Whitty revised the figure downward a bit, to 92%, but never was able to come up with a source for either number. This is climate change advocacy at its best, or rather at its worst. Proponents of the hypothesis grab entirely unsupportable, ridiculous numbers out of thin air and eventually such twaddle is repeated and referenced enough that it becomes a “fact” in the eyes of those who desperately want the doomsday scenario to be true.
Monckton was at the top of his game. When his turn came to speak, his cummerbund somehow came undone. Knowing Monckton this was a rather unlikely “accident,” but rather a bit of theater designed to make a point. He held the garment up to the audience and said:
[...]
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
-
Archives
- May 2012 (577)
- April 2012 (624)
- March 2012 (635)
- February 2012 (782)
- January 2012 (672)
- December 2011 (519)
- November 2011 (361)
- October 2011 (539)
- September 2011 (500)
- August 2011 (584)
- July 2011 (523)
- June 2011 (451)
-
Categories
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS
