-----Original Message-----
From: Brice Yokem [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
At the OISM site she linked it says:
This is the website that completely knocks the wind out of the enviro's
sails. See over 17,000 scientists declare that global warming is a lie with
no scientific basis whatsoever.
The global warming hypothesis has failed every relevant experimental test.
Did 17,000 scientists really say that global warming is a "lie"? I looked
further and found the actual words of the petition. What they actually
agreed with was this:
There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon
dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the
foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and
disruption of the Earth's climate. So they weren't saying that it was a lie
or wasn't happening, just that there wasn't good evidence that it would be a
catastrophe. The OISM people have misrepresented their own petition.
------------------
I really do not get this part. It looks to me like the 'lie' is that there
is scientific basis for human activities causing global warming. It is not
hard to equate that to 'global warming is a lie'. True, the two statements
are not exactly the same, but it takes a very fine microscope to make the
distinction betwen the two as well as some tedious word games. I call this
a distinction without a difference.
--------------------
-------------------------
At the risk of sending everyone to sleep, it isn't that "there is
scientific basis for human activities causing global warming" that's the
contentious part, it's that bit about "cause catastrophic heating of the
Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate", which is a lot
harder to find conclusive evidence about*. Or as Tim says, quite clearly,
"just that there wasn't good evidence that it would be a catastrophe".
Which is plainly not the same as "over 17,000 scientists declare that
global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever". I don't
believe the change in emphasis was an accident. And nor does Gerri Halliwell
PhD.
*And this is partly at least because not everybody will agree on what
"catastrophe" means.
__________________________________________________________________
This message might contain confidential information. If it has been sent to you in error please do not forward it or copy it or act upon its contents, but report it to [log in to unmask]
Schroders has the right lawfully to record, monitor and inspect messages between its employees and any third party. Your messages shall be subject to such lawful supervision as Schroders deems to be necessary in order to protect its information, its interests and its reputation.
Schroders prohibits and takes steps to prevent its information systems from being used to view, store or forward offensive or discriminatory material. If this message contains such material please report it to [log in to unmask]
Schroders does not normally accept or offer business instructions via email unless prior agreements are in place. Any action that you might take upon this message might be at your own risk.
Schroder Investment Management Limited
31 Gresham Street
London EC2V 7QA
Authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority. Schroder Investment Management Limited is entered on the FSA register under the following register number: 119348
Registered Office
31 Gresham Street
London EC2V 7QA
Registered number 1893220
VAT registration number 243 8687 30
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *
|
