I notice he still put forth the quickly being debunked theory of ‘we are causing Climate Change’. It’s disappointing. Why not stick to the proven — that we do need to be good stewards of the environment, without falling for the political views of questionable science?
I know, I know, HE’S an environmentalist and I’m not. But I read a lot of studies by environmental scientists who disagree with human caused global warming.
Especially now that there is strong evidence that the pro-anthropogenic side has been purposely slanting the data to support their side. Politics not science is what is holding up THAT side of the (squelched) debate.
I notice he still put forth the quickly being debunked theory of ‘we are causing Climate Change’. It’s disappointing. Why not stick to the proven — that we do need to be good stewards of the environment, without falling for the political views of questionable science?
I know, I know, HE’S an environmentalist and I’m not. But I read a lot of studies by environmental scientists who disagree with human caused global warming.
Please read both sides before you come to the conclusion something is being debunked.
What are both sides of “let’s cook the data til it tells what we want it to tell?”
Ob,
What makes you think I haven’t? The evidence is overwhelmingly on the side of Natural Cause/Earth Cycle causing climate change.
JE
Especially now that there is strong evidence that the pro-anthropogenic side has been purposely slanting the data to support their side. Politics not science is what is holding up THAT side of the (squelched) debate.