Comments on: McLeroy, Science and ‘Hooey’

By: T Maz

T Maz — Fri, 03 Apr 2009 14:18:42 +0000

Sorry, when it comes to global warming, a skeptical view of the debate comes down on the side of human causation being not likely. The IPCC is a governmental board, that solicited input from scientists, but drew up the conclusions at odds with many of the members. IPCC is not a good source.

The models upon which global climate projections are made are very complex, and some of the inputs are very poorly understood. How to handle clouds, for example. They warm at night, but cool during the day (very approximately). And the error bars around the projections are much larger than any of the changes projected.

Sorry, better evidence needed before we buy that one.

By: Charles

Charles — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 05:44:06 +0000

I think it would be accurate to say that they have “a bazaar of the bizarre.”

By: Coragyps

Coragyps — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 22:49:31 +0000

“Conservatives like me think the evidence (for human contributions to global warming) is a bunch of hooey.”

There’s what blows my poor little occasionally rational mind – that listening to demagogue right-wing clowns like Rush Limbaugh sling their antiscience takes the place of reading actual scientific evidence. The IPCC, despite McLeroy’s and Rush’s claims to the contrary, is not a huge cell of commie freedom-hating pinko gay baby-killing libruls out to invent ways to bring about the fall of Exxon, Christianity, and Amurrica. They really do have the science! It gets published after it’s peer-reviewed!

And it’s so bizarre how issues get bundled – right-wingism with anti-evolutionism, global warming denialism, and often HIV/AIDS denialism. I wonder if Dr McLeroy wears rubber gloves when he pulls premolars?