Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« A Non-Communist Left comeback? | Main | King-Byng redux? Not likely. »

Wednesday, April 04, 2007

An inconvenient truth for Dr. Suzuki

Amadea Vance, a teen who attends Christ the Redeemer Anglican Church in Surrey B.C., may already be on the way to becoming a good reporter. She notices things...to Dr. David Suzuki's possible dismay.

Dr. Suzuki recently came to her church to give a talk. Miss Vance reports on his visit in the current issue of Topic, the local Anglican monthly newspaper.

She begins (emphasis mine):

"It was only 10 AM and already Christ the Redeemer Anglican Church was packed. David Suzuki arrived in a campaign style tour bus...."

I would like to be wrong, but I doubt there is any "campaign style tour bus" that is environmentally friendly. Perhaps Dr. Suzuki might like to try the "mass transit" style of bus. I can assure him, from personal experience, that that type of bus can get him almost anywhere in Surrey that he might wish to go.

I wonder if local media outlets, such as The Vancouver Sun, have thought about doing an article on Dr. Suzuki's own impact on the enviroment? At any rate, I doubt that the Sun shall be doing such an article in the May 5 issue of that newspaper, when Dr. Suzuki will be "editor for a day".


Posted by Rick Hiebert on April 4, 2007 in Science | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference An inconvenient truth for Dr. Suzuki:


Isn't a true scientist(even one not trained in the appropriate field)supposed to be out gathering facts and testing theories....not travelling to schools and churches to try and convince people that his theory is the correct one?

BTW,I thought we concurred last week that the left-tilted media do not confront the likes of Suzuki/Gore/Travolta/Moore on their hypocritical actions.No matter how damning the evidence is.

The fact is...I think manmade global warming is pure socialist bullsh*t.At the same time I leave a far far smaller footprint than any of these eco-hypocrites.

Yet I am the type of person the 'believers' stop to take time and criticize,meanwhile protecting these two-faced climate-abusers.

Yet more hypocrisy.

Posted by: Canadian Observer | 2007-04-04 10:55:09 AM

That group, including but not limited to Suzuki/Gore/Travolta/Moore, are simply a bunch of attention whores riding on the GW gravy train.

Posted by: David | 2007-04-04 11:49:27 AM

Yes, what hypocrisy! More like BS-one needs a shovel around these three (Suzuki, Gore & Travolta), who claim they off-set their footprints by buying carbon credits, so feel they can pollute all they want.

I myself have conserved for years. That means, never leaving a light burning unnecessarily, watching TV by it's light, bathing in 2-4 inches of water (more if I wash my hair), recycling paper, glass, aluminum cans, doing all my errands on one day, which includes grocery shopping and trips to the Sally Ann to drop off my recycled clothing and housewares that I no longer need.
I turn down my heat every night and short of heating & lighting by candlelight, I feel I'm doing my part and have been long before Al Gore says he had his environmental awakening.

So don't preach to me, you jerks until you clean up your acts, without buying carbon credits, which by the way, do nothing for the environment.

Posted by: Rose | 2007-04-04 11:57:36 AM

Well, if Mr. Suzuki is now going to visit a church, perhaps someone would be kind enough to educate the man on the fact that his current efforts are, for the most part, a waste of time. For anyone who has read Scripture can be certain that the Earth and heavens will be destroyed by fire.

There are currently some intense efforts being made across the planet to reduce the volume of gasses that are by-products of combustion. It is somewhat ironic that the relatively small amounts of gasses currently being targeted for reduction will be significantly superceded by a much larger volume of gasses and heat which are also by-products of combustion.

This describes one of the last warnings given to mankind:


This describes the final event itself:


I suspect Mr. Suzuki would not listen, but it could be interesting to try...

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-04-04 12:06:38 PM


Mankind must pass a law that decreases solar activity!

How dare the sun burn us up!

The sky is falling! The sky is falling!

Posted by: Set you free | 2007-04-04 12:11:32 PM

What a pack of hypocrites, all being paid to go around shooting the poop about GW and pigging out on the very things they tell we peons to cut down and out out.
Looking forward to the day when have to snack on crow.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-04-04 12:17:21 PM

If he'd shown up in a horse drawn cart with brochures handwritten on reused pages from a 1960's copy of "The Silent Spring" you'd be bitching that he was a hypocrite for abusing animals with his cart.

But I'll let you get back to kissing each others asses.

Posted by: Observer | 2007-04-04 12:17:57 PM

Observer: Ignorant/rude comment.

Charlatans have always been around. Snake Oil salesmen come to mind with this latest onslaught of bogus "experts".

If you want to go with Gore who has no background in what he's peddling and Suzuki who is an expert on fruit flies or fig leaves, go for it.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-04-04 12:34:08 PM

"If he'd shown up in a horse drawn cart with brochures handwritten on reused pages from a 1960's copy of "The Silent Spring" you'd be bitching that he was a hypocrite for abusing animals with his cart.

-and if the Queen had n**s she'd be the King. What's your point?

The fact remains Suzukigore and all the other harpies of the left do NOT practise what they scream.

Posted by: Larry | 2007-04-04 12:42:57 PM

LizJ... Straw Man. You and I both know that Gore, Suzuki, Anderson, Flannery, et al. are presenting information compiled from thousands of climate scientists who have done their work. If Paramount shipped AIC DVD's in creosote soaked styrofoam it wouldn't negate the facts that convinced the US Supreme Court to rule that CO2 was a pollutant that the USEPA must regulate, or the facts that have California's Republican governor taking action too. But faced with overwhelming scientific consensus and irreversible momentum in public opinion, you're stuck criticizing the packaging instead of the content, and the waiter instead of the meal.

Posted by: Observer | 2007-04-04 12:50:14 PM


If public opinion is on the side of the liars, it's no wonder Adolf Hitler was so successful.

The US Supreme Court rules CO2 is a pollutant and therefor CO2 is a pollutant?

It is truly sad that intellectual midgets like yourself buy into this bogus politics.

Since when has science been about predicting future events?

Science has ALWAYS been about finding explanations for things that already exist, not about some scary scenario in the future.

This is not pure science ... it is pure politics in which fear is used to control an unsuspecting and overly trusting public.

Posted by: Set you free | 2007-04-04 1:48:06 PM

Speaking of science, Godwin's Law (eductio ad Hitlerum) is demonstrated once again.

When backed into a corner, internet debaters will always evoke Hitler and go ad hominem on you. The number of posts before they evoke Hitler is inversely proportional to the amount of confidence they have in their case.

Posted by: Observer | 2007-04-04 1:53:30 PM

That would explain why they do not like to debate anyone with another view.
They neither know nor practice what they spew.

Some of these so-called climate experts appear to debunk the Archimedes Principle as well.

Eminent scientists debunk the GW theory, that is the other side but it isn't in vogue at this particular time.

We all know we have to clean up our air and that can be accomplished without snuffing out our economy.
We won't be taking any lessons on how to do it from people who need large gas guzzlers to haul large entourages around. It's time Suzi parked his bus. CBC will give him all the exposure he wants.

Posted by: LizJ | 2007-04-04 2:01:45 PM

Have you listened to anything Gore or Suzuki have said about economics? Because if you did you wouldn't be talking about snuffing the economy at all. You'd be avoiding the topic altogether to keep the talk squarely on the bus, since that's all that's left to criticize.

Gore mocks the Big Three for not having kept up with their efficient Asian competitors, and when I saw Suzuki live the opening speaker was a conservative Albertan who'd made millions of dollars on run-of-the-river micro hydroelectric dams. Their position on economics has been that we're risking huge long-term setbacks by not showing leadership in responsible fuel and energy, responsible product design, and responsible food sources. This isn't some big secret or some radical adaptive swing in policy, this is what they've been saying for years.

I can only attribute the disinformation to fear and resent.

Posted by: Observer | 2007-04-04 2:17:23 PM

"...Straw Man. You and I both know that Gore, Suzuki, Anderson, Flannery, et al. are presenting information compiled from thousands of climate scientists who have done their work."

No. They are presenting their interpretation of the information compiled by thousands of scientists and filtered through organizations such as the IPCC, environmental organizations, and media organizations.

" But faced with overwhelming scientific consensus and irreversible momentum in public opinion, ..."

Please provide the survey of the world's leading scientists whereby they unequivocally agreed with the following:

1) The earth has warmed in the last 100+ years
2) The warming is unprecedented in the natural cycle
3) Most of the warming is anthropegenically caused.

"...you're stuck criticizing the packaging instead of the content, and the waiter instead of the meal."

Which is precisely what you are doing here. I am prepared to debate the science. Are you?

I might add that Gore and Suzuki have also done their own share of criticizing the packagain instead of the content.

If I said the following to you, what would be your response?

"Professor Tim Ball disputes the AGW presise and here is his paper on why..."

"Professor Lindzen disputes the AGW presise and here is his paper on why..."

This people dispute the consensus and ,right or wrong, offer scientific counter examples.

What say you to them in response?

Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-04-04 3:23:02 PM

Suzuki has done far more as an environmental educator than anybody else in this country, and has consistently "walked the walk" with many examples of sustainable living practices.

For those who don't act (I realize some on this forum have for years, and good on you!) who still preach against him and his purchases of carbon credits are being disingenuous; you'd complain of him being a Luddite if he walked ... the fact is you'd sooner put your head in the sand rather than engage with him thoughtfully.

Carbon credits (investing in alternative energy, energy efficiency, etc.) are a necessary first step in transitioning to a carbon neutral economy; cap and trading of air pollution credits has done wonders for acid rain and ozone depletion. Similar market mechanisms will likely prove essential in combating climate change.

By the way .... I'm new to this forum .... "GW" stands for George Walter in these parts right ?

Posted by: Panama | 2007-04-04 3:31:33 PM

"Suzuki has done far more as an environmental educator"

Suzuki is a biologist, Gore is a fat gas bag, failed to be elected politician.

If I need advice on how to dissect a frog or how not to get elected, I might consider their advice worthwhile.

The fact these two con artists, with absolutely no back ground in climatology, scientology, or any worthwhile "ology", can run around in their private busses and jet planes lecturing, and convincing morons like you the world is about to end, simply shows the stupidity of a good many residents of this planet.

I will believe the real science, backed up with some good old common sense to make my decisions.

But hey, that's just me.

You believe these con men all you want to.

By the way, GW stands for "Gore Windbag" in my part of the world. Sorry to burst your bubble.

Posted by: deepblue | 2007-04-04 4:30:46 PM

My two cents;
OBSERVER, I am an automotive engineer, I work for Toyota. I can tell you, as an educated person IN THE FIELD, that hybrids are less environmental than virtually ANY other 4 cylinder compact or sub-compact; less recycleable, more exotic/ energy intensive to make alloys/ materials are used, they are built in Japan and have to be shipped around the damn world to their eco-weenie buyers, the list goes on. They are built in dedicated factories, at least on dedicated production lines- so wasteful. They use battteries that are envvironmental disasters in the making that require, to dispose of properly, (Shipping, dismantling, separating, shipping component parts to other reclamation facilities, again the list goes on) the same average amount of energy used in an average urban home for 4.2 months. That's for one set, they last approximately 100000- 120000 km's, you can bank on at least 3 total for the life of the car, maybe 4. I could go on and on and on, but most likely you don't care as your mind is already made up. The true sign of a lefty.

You believe that the economy is safe from Kyoto; check out the Toronto Sun column by what's-her-name today; it's just basic math, even the Sun can't eff that up! IF we park all of our cars, planes, trucks, boats and RV,s, shut down the oil sands completely, and cross our fingers and hope REAL hard, we will meet our reduction targets under Kyoto. The alternative to shutting down our country is to spend biillions on carbon credits, allowing us to pollute! What kind of solution is that?! IF the UN/ MSM/ Suzuki's/ Gore's were correct in this whole GW thing, and that man is at fault, we should be able to spend those billions at home, here in Canada, on wind turbines, solar, biofuels, and so on. BUT, NO, we must send those billions through the UN (imagine what their cut would be) to failed states in the third world for Kyoto to "work". By work I assume to transfer western $$$ from the west without any real progress.

I have to come clean here folks; I'm a paid member of the Green Party, have been for nearly 10 years. I believe that we have to clean this shyte up, that we shouldn't be spewing toxins into our environment, into the water we drink, the food we eat. We mostly don't need SUV's or big arsed trucks. Ditto for air conditioning (like my home), or, for that matter, most other energy wasteful "conveniences" like microwave ovens. In short, I was living clean before most of you stopped soiling your shorts. When I see the issues that I hold dear hijacked by self serving hypocrites like Suzuki/ Gore it makes me furious. Completely furious. Like the hard right, the hard left has an agenda, and it can be just as hateful, just as partisan, as WRONG, as those of the hard right.

GW is based on climate models trying to predict the future dozens, hundreds of years from now. If you believe this to be correct, why can't the weather be predicted a day in advance acccurately? Why can't solar activity be predicted in advance acccurately? Earthquakes? Perhaps because, by nature all of these events are somewhat random in nature?

I'm approaching my retirement years now, been around the block a time ot two. I remember the hysteria around DDT, "it must be banned!!" shrieked The Smart People. It was, the science has been debunked, what are we left with? tens of millions of dead third world children- your "side" should give itself a big pat on the back for that one. I remember my grade 11 science teacher telling me that, by the year 2000, the city of Windsor would be under at least 5 feet of ice, due to "Global Cooling". Of course, the very next week, Windsor was whacked with a snowfall that was previously unheard of in recorded records, it was waist deep. Can you guess what the media and my teacher said then? At the time, being beningly dumb, too lazy to investigate other theories and not knowing better, can you guess which wagon I hitched my horse to? I was terrified, my friends and I started planning to move to South America when the ice age came! Well, that seemed to blow over too. The next threat was the Ozone hole, again the media was quite happy to put the impending disaster on the front page. THIS time I was a bit brighter, less lazy, so I looked into it. Gee, the big scare was in 1993, Mt. Pinotubo spewed what, millions of tons of clorene (a known and very effective ozone depleter)into the atmosphere in 1992 during it;s eruption, yet the left and trendies wanted only to "punish" the west for having cold beer and automotive AC, never was a thought given to what was a natural disaster. Since R-12 was banned (1994?), the ozone hole got smaller, then it got larger, now it's startinng to get smaller again. IF R-12 was the devil in aerosol form, why the fluctuation? In the real world 2+2 always equals 4, not sometimes, it doesn't fluctuate!

I want to point something out here; I think that Suzuki was "for" ALL of these impending disasters, believing the science to be sound. Were he a pro baseball player with a batting average like that he'd be demoted to towel boy. I admire him for his gusto, for his passion, I just don't trust his opinion any longer, there is no empirical data based on his past to change my mind this time. Would you trust George Bush for another go at the White House based on his batting record?

In closing I think that the every thoughtful person should go rent Gore's film; then go to YuoTube and watch the Great Global Warming Swindle and compare notes. Judge for yourself, heck, you're just as qualified to pass judgement on the veracity of GW as the lefties and politicians!

Posted by: Hoser | 2007-04-04 4:53:21 PM


Great post.

Posted by: deepblue | 2007-04-04 5:07:51 PM


My latest bumper sticker.

Posted by: obc | 2007-04-04 5:19:09 PM

Where can I get that bumper sticker? It'd look good on the back of my nearly completed veggie fuel benz!

Posted by: Hoser | 2007-04-04 5:35:12 PM

If you see me in B.C. today or tomorrow, flag me down & I'll give you one. I'll be in Calgary after that for several weeks.

Posted by: obc | 2007-04-04 5:43:51 PM

Observer said

"If he'd shown up in a horse drawn cart with brochures handwritten on reused pages from a 1960's copy of "The Silent Spring" you'd be bitching that he was a hypocrite for abusing animals with his cart."


Panama said

"...; you'd complain of him being a Luddite if he walked ... the fact is you'd sooner put your head in the sand rather than engage with him thoughtfully. "

Interesting pattern of thoughtful engagement. Are you two sure you aren't the same person.

I just wonder how you KNOW that is what would be said by posters here. Ad hominem mind reading.

This is what is commonly called PROJECTION. It is used not to sway debate in your favour but out of frustration. Please present your scientific arguments and I will respond in kind.

Please stop accusing us of not being interested in a scientific debate because we can't debate without resorting to frustrated ad hominems.

Posted by: h2o273kk9 | 2007-04-04 6:16:31 PM

And still some are so narrow-minded as to defend these hypocritical pitchmen with the carbon credit ruse.

So in other words...we can burn as much fossil fuel as we want...it's OK as long as we can afford the penalty.

Let me point out just how stupid this argument is.

It is no different than claiming a dangerously obese man can lose weight by continuing to sit around and over-eat....as long as he keeps paying his health club dues.

Why should I be surprised that the solution is as based in fantasy as the problem.

Posted by: Canadian Observer | 2007-04-04 6:38:09 PM

History shows that all of north America was under ice at one time.There is also proof that the planet has been warming at a steady pace since 1680.Too many campfires I guess.The truth about global warming.....(wait for it)..........is that people are now taller than they used to be , and it only feels like it's warmer because our heads are closer to the sun.See how simple that was. 100 carbon credits please.

Posted by: peterj | 2007-04-04 11:38:27 PM


Please post URLs for those 2 papers. Thank you.

Posted by: Brent Weston | 2007-04-05 8:04:31 AM

Speaking of church... buying Global Warming credits reminds me of Indulgences sold by the Roman Catholic church prior to the Reformation. If you sinned, you could buy an indulgence that will get you out of hell. It was one of the biggest ways to raise money, and according to some (esp Luther), the biggest scam.

I see the same thing here. Gore, Suzuki, etc think they can still have a huge environmental footprint and then just buy 'forgiveness'. When is a brave environmentalist going to nail a Theses to Gore's door saying that this is no longer acceptable?

Posted by: GGF | 2007-04-05 11:05:09 AM

I'll try and respond to a couple of replies here:

First, Suzuki hasn't seriously conducted biological research for years; he has used his training almost exclusively to teach Canadians and others how mankind and the environment interact with one another, and has been momentually important in popularizing science reporting in this country. Some see this as problematic, whereas I see value in scientists or other researchers steping out of their cloistered niche and step into the public policy field.

Heck, Harper claims to be an economist, yet besides his BA has never done serious economic research. That doesn't mean he can't express opinions on economic matters of course ! While I don't agree with his politics I do admire his conviction and forcefulness when it comes to core economic principles. He -- like Suzuki -- are both policy wonks coming from *very* different perspectives.

As for carbon credits, those seriously interested in creating a carbon neutral economy DON'T see trading as a permanent solution ! Just like we have reduced NOX, SOX and CFC emissions through capping allowable emissions and trading excess emissions, the regulatory framework will allow/force the economy to gradually but steadily reduce CO2 and other GHGs until in effect trading would be a) illegal or b) too expensive for a business to contemplate.

Assuming those critical of the trading schematic actually WANT to see domestic GHG's reduced, what would you propose the Canadian government or North America as a whole due ?

Posted by: Panama | 2007-04-05 2:32:13 PM

"Heck, Harper claims to be an economist, yet besides his BA has never done serious economic research."
Posted by: Panama | 5-Apr-07 2:32:13 PM

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has a MASTERS degree in Economics.

Posted by: Speller | 2007-04-05 2:59:30 PM

To reply to Panama:
You wrote "Assuming those critical of the trading schematic actually WANT to see domestic GHG's reduced, what would you propose the Canadian government or North America as a whole due?".

Well, I suggest that we invest that potential carbon credit $ we will be "obligated" to spend (if we miss the 2012 reduction deadline) into the Oilsands, into our energy infrasructure, into our homes and cars, instead of feeding an international brokerage in carbon credits and propping up 3rd world tyrants with our tax money. Iraqi "Oil For Food" anyone? Yet, strangely enough, that is not allowed, is it? Why?

I for one would be proud to see PM Harper stand up and say that Canada shall indeed meet the mandated Kyoto targets through internal investment/ research only. If we can actually clean up things somewhat without taking part in this international money laundering scam I'd be content. While I do not believe that man and man's CO2 is driving any significant climate change we can still make a difference and clean up our air. I am completely against the whole trading scheme, it enriches an elite new class of white collar brokerage "experts" and, likely, will somehow financially benefit the UN. I wouldn't be surprised if one of Kofi's kids were involved!

Of course, if a nation can meet it's obligations by the deadline no carbon trading need take place. BUT, if the nation cannot, which is the boat Canada is now in, Thanks to Dion and the lieberals, then I think the only alternative under the treaty is to "buy" credits from 3rd world countries. You don't actually decrease a damn thing when this happens, you just send your wealth elsewhere. Quite a solution, eh? When this comes to pass, when the PM has to stand up and admit that we will miss the deadline, THAT"S when we MUST refuse to partake in the UN sponsored, Canadian taxpayer funded guilt buyouts, aka carbon credit trading!

Posted by: Hoser | 2007-04-05 3:32:57 PM

What so many fail to note is that any monies going towards buying carbon credits will invariably come off the backs of the average working joe.
Companies that 'overpollute'will have little choice but to pass along 'extra incurred expenses'...read overhead on to the end consummer through a multitude of ingenious avenues.
The end result being that in this country specifically,the average Cdn.will pay,pay,pay.
Pay more for goods and more in taxes that though earmarked for environment,end up in wasteful dead end govn't projects filed under General Revenue..

The Gores,Suzukis etc. will literally buy their way out.
This will accomplish one thing only and that as we all should know is a third world economy whereby the have-nots only get more needy.
This problem will only escalate in time to a point of desperation which in turn will escalate to more high-handed measures of crowd control.
The end result being more gated communities,private policing,general social erosion etc.
Sound like Sci-Fi?
Not really:Just look around; its already happening on the globe.
Meanwhile the Al Gores and Suzukis continue their everyday consumption habits and fly off into the blue yonder,sipping their designer drinks,knowing that the world is a better place because they have purchased carbon imunities and are therefore entitled to live in their insular world.
The useful idiot/ common man bedamned.

Posted by: Simon | 2007-04-05 5:12:46 PM

Good post Hoser!
Keep'um coming, pal.

Hot stuff, Simon.
You and Hoser are GREAT new Shotgunners.

Jeez, it must suck rocks to be a Liberal/Communist/Greenie these days.

That's what I say when I sneeze greenies!
It must be the carbon.

Posted by: Speller | 2007-04-05 6:47:21 PM

Of course the cost this will be born upon the shoulders of average Canucks. The Government has no money other than that which it taxes from the populace. Maybe we can cancel that extra $$ going to the Eastern provinces to pay for carbon credits!

I am normally a sickeningly positive person, but I fear that it is too far gone now; one cannot even discuss alternatives to the "accepted" theories, I've tried, the useful idiots don't want to their preconceptions spoiled by facts, their minds are made up! It appears as if people whom are capable of critical thought are either a) willfully ignorant, b) willfully silent or 3) cashing in on all this.

What's that old adage, "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em?" Perhaps Al Gore will help those on The Shotgun set up a carbon trading company too! Without the help of such a loved and well respected (by fellow commmies and lefties) Great Man like Gore, our venture wouldn't even get off the ground. After all, you need to have contacts among the 3rd world dictators and despots; you need to be known to them in order to acquire their nations share of global carbon credits on behalf of The Shotgun Carbon Trading Company. Then, we can buy our credits from ourselves, after we've bought them for 1/2 the price from some Marxist basket case of an African country. We can wash those lovely profits through the corporation, avoid taxes, and go buy big tour buses and giant energy consumptive homes, get all preachy, and go on the lecture circuit for a quarter mil a pop! It works for them.

And to respond to Spellers comment about it sucking to be a Greenie these days; yeah, it does man, it sure does. I know that all of my efforts to date to make my life greener, to invest in my home to make it efficient ($50k+ and counting), buy and modify an old Benz 300TD to run on WVO (almost done!), using an effen manual reel mower on my chemical free yet weed full lawn, my time and effort fighting the local township to allow a wind turbine (down but not out!) is all cancelled out by less than 4 months of Gore runnning the AC in his mansion. It would be real easy to throw my hands in the air and give up, but if we all sucked energy like Gorzuki, globe trotting and GHG spewing bus riding from one cocktail party to the next this planet would be well and truly screwed.

Posted by: Hoser | 2007-04-05 9:20:35 PM

Don't worry, Hoser, the whole carbon is our enemy schtick is a load of horse squeeze.

Our own bodies are made of carbon and CO2 is NOT a toxin.
I've lived through plenty of man-made hype and I hope to live through plenty more.

I just got my copy of the book "UNSTOPPABLE GLOBAL WARMING every 1,500 years" by S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery and Hoser, you are going to want a copy of this book to ease you tortured mind.

Global Warming is caused by cosmic radiation, the pendulum swing comes in about 750 year phases and the world warms every 1,500 years.
They have known this from ice core sampling from both of the polar regions since the mid 1980s.

Posted by: Speller | 2007-04-05 11:05:01 PM

The biggest problem with activists of all stripes is that they can never say everything is fine.When everything is fine,all funding grinds to a halt.Every generation has it's panic cause and hardcore activists will always be there.When they ride this horse into the ground they will simply change horses and look for another cause.

Posted by: peterj | 2007-04-05 11:27:43 PM

The problem, petej, is that this generation has a very real cause for panic.
Two actually, Communism and Islam.

Posted by: Speller | 2007-04-05 11:33:58 PM

Speller....you are absolutely right and in the long run they are much more dangerous than global warming.

Posted by: peterj | 2007-04-05 11:48:48 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.