This is the opening sentence in a YahooNews article:
The upcoming UN report on climate change is not likely to rattle US deniers of global warming who hold sway in the halls of power, experts say.
Can anyone guess just what expertise it would take to say such a thing? Would it be an expert in global warming? The UN? Halls of power? Deniers? “Experts say” is just thrown out there to make us think the author is feeding off a higher authority.
And so it goes in another “news” article on climate change that actually has nothing to do with science and everything to do with politics with a heavy emphasis on ad hominid in order to diminish any doubt that global warming is on the way.
One such “expert” who seems to appear in these “news” pieces is Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists. What Mr. Meyers field is, the article won’t say (I refuse to Google it to find out, I just don’t care) but he seems to be the go-to guy when it comes to feeling good about ourselves when we can’t stand that anyone has the nerve to question climate change.
Here’s what Meyers has to say:
The IPCC report will help for the observers and the public to understand where the majority of the scientists' opinion stands...But I don't think it will change the mind of the hard core deniers. We don't call them skeptics, because they are not putting forward alternatives ideas and having them tested in a peer review journals. They basically deny this problem...
Are we to think that there is no such thing as a scientist or a field of study that cast doubt on global warming that is not “tested” in “peer review journals”? If this is the impression Meyers would have us believe then he is a total fraud who is hoping we take his word for it just as the hack journalist writing this hack piece does because he considers Meyer an “expert”.
The article goes to bolster the argument of global warming by demonstrating that “deniers” (a made-up word) are rotten people for different reasons:
First they’re political whores:
Climate skeptics and deniers dominate the House of Representatives,but Meyer said some legislators admit privately that the science is correct and that global warming is being exacerbated by fossil fuel use. ."But they cannot say it because they will be challenged in the primary (elections in 2014) by the Tea Party,"
Admit privately to whom? Would it be Meyers the “concerned” scientist? Meyers nor the so-called journalist don’t say, there is no attribution to the statement whatsoever. Republicans are political whores, they believe one thing but vote another because they don’t want to lose their job. So says the scientist who gives no evidence by a journalist unconcerned with attribution. Nice trick.
A bunch of religious wackos:
...those who doubt the theory of evolution and believe in creationism are often climate skeptics or deniers, according to Joe Casola, an expert at the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions in Washington...
If Casola is an “expert” in “Climate and Energy Solutions” he must know what he’s talking about when it comes to “climate skeptics”. If you believe that God is the creator, for instance, chances are you are one of those type, therefore your skepticism is suspect. How’s that for scientific method?
Big oil business is buying off scientist and intimidating them too:
The movement to deny climate change is bolstered by influence groups that oppose regulations that would limit CO2 emissions...According to Greenpeace, these lobbies have funnelled nearly $150 million to more than 80 conservative groups from 2002 to 2011. Among the largest donors are billionaires Charles and David Koch of Koch Industries, as well as oil giant ExxonMobil."Their intent is to intimidate scientists and, indeed, to get them to second guess themselves," said Michael Mann, professor at Penn State University and author of "The Hockey Stick and the Climate War.""In that sense, the hundreds of millions of dollars spent by industry front groups and individuals like the Koch Brothers to attack and intimidate the scientists have partly achieved their goal,"
If by some crazy chance there is a scientist out there that isn’t down with the dopey Hockey Stick graph, then it must be (according to the experts) that those scientists are intimidated by attacks from billionaire’s using “front groups” and millions of dollars to "intimidate". How does a wad of cash intimidate anyone? I don’t know, but then again I’m no expert.
There is no legitimate reason to disbelieve in global warming, if you do you’re revealing a character flaw or maybe you’re just a horrible person. Don’t listen to me. It’s science!