The Globe and Mail has an article by Thomas Homer-Dixon and Andrew Weaver on "responding to the sceptics" that can be read here. It is rather shorter than How to talk to a climate sceptic, having only 4 points.
This is the overview of their Q&A:
- "GLOBAL WARMING HAS STOPPED."
Nonsense.
- "RECENT WARMING IS MOSTLY DUE TO AN INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF RADIATION COMING FROM THE SUN."
Rubbish.
- "THE CLIMATE IS ALWAYS CHANGING."
Yes, but so what?
- "SCIENTIFIC UNCERTAINTY IS SO GREAT THAT WE CAN'T MAKE FIRM POLICY DECISIONS."
Wrong.
Of course they offer a lot more detail, which you can read here.
More like this
Due to work stuff, I'm very busy this week, and I don't have time to write a detailed
pathological language post, so I chose something that doesn't take a lot of explanation, but
While browser over at programming.reddit.com, I came across something simultaneously hideous and amazing.
I saw it at Julie's.
"American Music," the Violent Femmes
"California Stars," Billy Bragg and Wilco
"The City of New Orleans," Arlo Guthrie
"Song to Woody," Bob Dylan
"The Body of an American," the Pogues
Nice to hear about some intelligent reporting about AGW in the "MSM". So often they play up the controversy to attract readers...
Of course living in Toronto I also have to watch the National Post's disgustingly dishonest B.S. on the same subject.
It's a shame the Globe and Mail also recently published an article supporting the oil sands industry:
http://www.sindark.com/2009/12/07/the-globe-and-mail-on-fossil-fuels-an…