Comments on: Wikipropaganda On Global Warming

National Review: Wikipedia Is A Stunning Example Of How The Propaganda Machine Works

[seafang]

" The NRO should know about fascist propaganda. As far as this moron Lawrence, how dare he call himself an environmentalist and allude to ANY scientific reasoning. Does he know about the precautionary principle? What is so bad about conserving?

Posted by noloyalisti at 04:52 PM : Jul 08, 2008 "

So just what does the precautionary principle say about starving tens or even hundreds of millions of people to death for lack of food due to the lack of petroenergy and chemicals to grow food worldwide.
And all for a thoroughly discredited thesis that Carbon dioxide causes global temperatures to rise.

There''s 550 million years of scientific data to show that changing atmospheric CO2 all the way from 7000 ppm during the Cambrian down to todays lowest of all time values in the 3-400 range, and that 20:1 change in CO2 did absolutely nothing to the global temperature, which has steadfastly refused to go above 22 deg C (71.6 F).

Even Al Gore''s ice core data in his book shows that it is changing temperaturesw which cause the CO2 to change 800 years LATER.

get some education and stop acting like sheep.

[jimfinster]

It is also amusing that he references Bennie Peiser, who is actually a UK social anthropologist. Not a climatologist at all. Sad.

[noloyalisti]

The NRO should know about fascist propaganda. As far as this moron Lawrence, how dare he call himself an environmentalist and allude to ANY scientific reasoning. Does he know about the precautionary principle? What is so bad about conserving?

[pvperson]

ejasdemo, I''m amazed at how OFTEN the NRO is in the opinion section. Seems every day and sometimes they are 2 out of 3 articles.

[pvperson]

"Wikipedia Is A Stunning Example Of How The Propaganda Machine Works".........I didn''t know FOX controlled Wikipedia.

[tejasdemo]

I continue to be amazed that CBS allows the National Nazi to publish this factless nonsense.

[jimfinster]

Easy solution.

Lawrence Solomon can start his own version of Wikipedia, to present his own set of "facts". Maybe Fox News would fund it. It could be called Crappopedia.

[heptagon-2009]

There''s a really good blog piece on Solomon''s "issues" at Wikipedia. See http://tugboatpotemkin.blogspot.com/2008/04/internet-wingnut-is-something-to-be.html .

[notblue]

Just because it''s on Wikipedia, doesn''t make it fact, kind of like the "facts" reported here at leftwing central. It is always interesting to hear the libs call everyone not in agreement with their ideology, mental midgets, idiots, etc. The truth is when one disagrees with a subject the intelligent route would be educated debate without the childish namecalling but not so for the libs that frequent these posts, they would much rather drink the kool-aide, bloviate, and insult than debate, that''s the leftwing way.

[naucoming4u]

I ran across a website the other day dedicated to disproving Global Warming. The ''''expert''''? An electrical engineer!

Posted by ubrew12 at 02:56 PM : Jul 08, 2008
...............

Of course, we run across people on these boards who still feel that the war in Iraq was a good idea and is successful... but they are typically experts in beer guzzling and NASCAR factoids.

[naucoming4u]

Wikipedia topics, especially subjects regarding science, are published by well educated/learned individuals who have (and site) sources of scientific FACT to back up the statements presented.

Of course, this is considered "propaganda" by mental midgets.

[argdatme39]

cofmanaaron-
Yes they are melting, yes it is getting hot. Did you know NASA was wrong when they posted their hottest day%u2019s list? I am all for going green when it makes a difference. I do think we as a people (world) should take care of what God given us. Oil spills, Chinas great air quality those are no brainier. As far as global warming caused by my car I just don%u2019t know how far to take it, yes it%u2019s on the news, they make movies. Then I think about this co2 tax, how will that fix things, who gets the money. I say why not more solar, wind and yes the scary one nuclear power. How if you are green can you say okay to coal and no to nuclear power. This source of energy is far more efficient, far less pollutant and there has not been any issue in many, many years. That%u2019s right folks we right now do get some power form NUCLEAR Power and we are okay. The problem is some simple as it always is $$$$$$$. We get well you know and someone gets our hard earned cash. Such as the CO2 tax thing they talk about. Madness. Just an FYI I recycle, part of the team, just not brain dead.

[cofmanaaron]

argdatme39: In case you were wondering: 1. Icebergs melt off of continental ice sheets such as Greenland and float out to sea. The ice in these sheets move from the center where ice accumulates, to the edge where they melt. So, that tunnel had probably moved from the ice sheet center, or else it may have been formed by meltwater in the glacier. Glaciers always accumulate in one area and melt in another. What is striking is how fast the melting part is happening now.
2. Ice ages occur about every 100,000 years and are caused by changes in CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere caused by changes in ocean currents upwelling deep water. The ocean current cycles are driven by different amounts of seasonal insolation driven by cyclic changes in Earth''s orbit. However,CO2 is rising far faster than at any time over the last million years, and temperature is rising pretty fast too. As for your wildfire statement, I really don''t know where you were going with that one.

[smurfcrusher]

"propagandists like NRO of course do not like Wikipedia because it is self-protected against their distortions and lies. it is similar to why burglars hate alarms and cockroaches hate sunlight."

Posted by andor3

Dude! Pure poetry. Great analogy, but don''t expect burglars to become law-abiding citizens or cockroaches to transmute into butterflies.

Reasonable people not afraid of the truth of global warming must unfortunately shoulder the burden of solutions, since the republicons are happy as clams ignoring the problem and dooming our future.

[smurfcrusher]

National Review: Is A Stunning Example Of How The Propaganda Machine Works. Brought to you by your friendly partners in politics, Big Oil.

[argdatme39]

Global warming huh? I saw an iceberg melt and under it was a tunnel made by man, so that tells me this is a cycle. What else will they sell us? Also recycling paper is not efficient at all. The government pays 9 billion a year to that industry to create jobs nothing else. Our money hard at work! But hey it does make since to recycle cans, that%u2019s the only one. But hey we are what we eat and the US feeds us this BS. Stop think, research everything. Have you heard of the ice age, maybe we created that by not burning enough fuel, HELLO. Have you seen all the fires in Ca as of late I bet that puts lots of pollution in the air! I wonder how cave man put out fires in there day, I mean they would burn out of control for a long time right%u2026oh I see that%u2019s how all that ice melted in the ice age. Come on.

[ubrew12]

linymo said: "global warming may have a degree of validity but it is from the sun and other natural stimuli"
Can you point me to data that says the solar constant has increased over the last 100 years? Cuz I can definitely point you to data that says CO2 levels have increased by 50% over the same time period.

[ubrew12]

An excellent site for info on Global warming is www.RealClimate.org

Its byline is ''climate science from climate scientists'' tells it all. You go to the ''denier'' web-sites and you''ll find all sorts of PhD''s, just none in climatology! I ran across a website the other day dedicated to disproving Global Warming. The ''expert''? An electrical engineer!

[cofmanaaron]

Hmmm, have you guys considered that maybe the reason that the complete *** that the ''deniers'' have tried to put on the site haven''t got there is because they are so outside the mainstream of science on this issue. After all, there are still ''scientists'' who believe that the Earth is orbited by the sun. Are they correct? NO. There are Christian scientists who claim that the evidence for an old ( 5000 years) Earth is incorrect. As a geologist, I assure you the Earth is old. So maybe it is in the same vein that these rent-a-scientists like Singer, bought and paid for by Exxon et al., are not credible in the eyes of mainstream science. Global warming is a scientific reality. I''d challenge any unbiased and educated scientist to disagree, and yes, taking money from an oil company disqualifies you.

[wogerwabbit]

National Review: Is A Stunning Example Of How The Propaganda Machine Works