There is a new comment on the post "The self-contradictions of Marc Morano". 
http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=2501

Author: ScruffyDan
Comment:
<blockquote>So where are you from ? I’ve commented before that I’ve been unable to find your bona fides .</blockquote>

You want to know where I am from? Well here is a hint: look at the top of your browser.

As for my '<em>bona fides</em>', given that I have already stated that I am not an expert on climate (thus why I really on experts on the subject), they are irrelevant.

<blockquote>It ain’t a conspiracy any more than traditional marxism was .</blockquote>

If logic fails, just compare global warming to Marxism! Classic denialism! 

<blockquote> It’s a belief system of which you are a member . </blockquote>

No, science is NOT belief. I don't believe in global warming, I accept it. There is a world of difference between the two.

<blockquote>It’s a movement whose guru is a failed christian leftist presidential candidate who was at best a B student in any technical course .</blockquote>

Are you dense?  take a look at the scientific organizations I already listed on this thread. Do you think they care about Al Gore?  As I already said, Al Gore is just a politician. He isn't part of the <em>scientific</em> debate.

But what is even more amusing is the fact that right after this statement you go on to quote an other politician... only this one agrees with you. Frankly I don't care what either of them say. they are politicians and not scientists, and I don't get my science form politicians.

Remember my shtick about relevant experts? Gore isn't one of them. Never was.

<blockquote>The utility of fear mongering of “pollution” of our atmospheric commons for motivating global governmental force has created a torrent of cash for any academics willing to climb aboard .</blockquote>

Right, because a dissenting scientist (like Lindzen) can't possibly find funding elsewhere. if only there were organizations (perhaps corporate organizations?) with huge piles of money that had a vested interest in proving climate change false, that could ensure that dissenting scientist (or even people who have never taken a science course in their lives) could get cash to fund their research. Too bad nothing like that exists. Oh wait!
http://www.exxon.com

<blockquote>At this point to claim that there is not an ever growing body of peer reviewed literature questioning the orthodoxy is either selective blindness or blunt dishonesty .</blockquote>

<strong>Then show me the studies!!!</strong> The fact that you refuse to do so isn't exactly winning you any points. In fact it's making you seem like a bald-faced liar!
 
<blockquote>On my vita you will see I spent about a decade in grad school .</blockquote>
 
Good for you, but I notice a distinct lack of climate expertise.  So your 'bona fides' are as irrelevant as my own.

If you want to continue this line of debate you are going to have to back your claims. <strong>Show me the studies, either put up or shut up.</strong>

See all comments on this post here:
http://mind.ofdan.ca/?p=2501#comments

To manage your subscriptions or to block all notifications from this site, click the link below:
http://mind.ofdan.ca/?wp-subscription-manager=1&email=bob%40cosy.com&key=cf28f344812041ce432d029d7cbe9ca5