skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Global warming "consensus" is only in the media
Lawrence Solomon:
The overwhelming consensus on global warming among journalists may be cracking. Last week, the world’s most prestigious newsmagazine – The Economist – backed away from its past alarmist position ...
... And now the London Telegraph’s venerable Geoffrey Lean concurs, in an article entitled “Global warming: time to rein back on doom and gloom?”
... For the journalists who are now reading this ... here is what needs to be known to cut through the scientific bafflegab and be confident as skeptics:
1. All of the scary global warming scenarios are based on computer models.
2. None of the models work.
3. There is and has been no scientific consensus.
To keep track of, and follow, the journalists who are becoming more skeptical of anthropogenic global warming, I have created a Twitter list, entitled Newly Skeptical AGW Media.
3 comments:
And I'd add to your list: consensus isn't science,means nothing. At many times in history,the consensus was wrong,with a capital "W".
Three hundred years ago,the consensus was that once you got past the initial Arctic ice pack, you'd enter a warm polar sea. A lot of explorers died for that one.
You're right. Consensus is for journalists, politicians and activists with an agenda not scientists.
And don't forget David Suzuki as well... Oh sorry. I did not mean to speak his name in public. I spoke blaspheme.
I meant to say: Don't forget 'He who shall not be named' as well.
Whew.
klem
Post a Comment