Sunday, November 15, 2009

Al Gore to be sued by over 30,000 Scientists for Global Warming fraud



Founder of the Weather Channel, John Coleman: "We have tried to get a debate on global warming with a scientists on the other side...but they said 'oh no the debate is over.' Well now there are 30,000 of us... 9,000 PHDs who have signed up to debunk global warming....You realize that Fox is the only cable network that will put us on the air, CNN won't...MSNBC won't...CBS/ABC wont', they scoff at us. We can't get on the air. If it weren't for the Internet you wouldn't even know I existed."

Now before you judge as some nut who doesn't believe in global warming, hear me out. I'm not for or against the Global Warming theory, but I am for a debate. I rushed to the theaters to see "An Inconvenient Truth" when it first came out and left being a full supporter of the Global Warming Theory; just as millions of people did I'm sure. But after that movie, the debate ended. Everyone seemed to accept Global Warming as truth, after all just look at all the pollution in world! Well the picture we got on TV was only 1/2 of the debate. What about those scientists that opposed to the theory? What are their claims and what evidence do they have against it? Do you realize that there has never been a televised debate between scientists on the Global Warming theory? Make up your own mind, don't let Al Gore do it for you. Take a look at the video, and if you get a chance read "35 Inconvenient Truths: The Errors in Al Gore's Movie"
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. UnknownNovember 15, 2009 at 3:57 PM

    Variously:

    1. this news is over a year old

    2. no case has been taken

    3. the "30,000 scientists" is a bit of a joke, because the 'qualification' to be a scientist is nothing more than a Bachelor's degree in any field that considers itself a 'science'

    4. there's a reason this stuff appears on YouTube rather than in the scientific journals - because it's part of a PR campaign, not part of a scientific debate

    5. the scientific debate doesn't pay any attention to Al Gore.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Radix2November 15, 2009 at 4:01 PM

    Further: Scientific questions are not resolved in televised debates.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Scipio AfricanusNovember 15, 2009 at 4:14 PM

    In Response to Joe,

    1. Thats beside the point, the average person is still unaware of the other side's arguments (or that there is even a debate here!).

    2. Thats beside the point, 30,000 scientists have signed to make a case. Although there is no case yet, people are trying to make one.

    3. Be that as it may, these people know more about science that the average person. You still have 30,000 bachelor's degrees, and 9,000 PHDs. Isn't that enough people for a debate?

    4. Youtube is neutral, you can find both good and bad information on there. Prove that John Coleman is simply campaigning for PR when he says that there hasn't even been a debate.

    5. Your idea of "the scientific debate" may not include Al Gore, but when the only side of the debate that millions of viewers have been exposed to is from Al Gore's movie, then it is part of the debate. You can't ignore his movie when it's the only thing that most of the population knows about Global Warming.

    Radix2,

    Exactly, thats the problem here. Why can't CNN take John Coleman and Al Gore (or some other pro-global warming scientist), have them sit down and debate for a couple hours.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Scipio AfricanusNovember 15, 2009 at 4:28 PM

    Also, why is it "politically correct" for anyone to believe in global warming, but only scientists with PHDs can oppose it? The average person thats exposed the pro-global warming side of the debate isn't a scientist, yet their opinions are broad-casted around the globe every day.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)