I have no idea what Bear's position is on this. He seems to swing between acceptance of the science and a personal desire that the science be ignored because it will affect him monetarily. However, that is not the issue.
He has made his position on this issue quite clear.
What I give you IS logic and science. You return irrationality.
What you provide is the train of logic that you accept and denounce all other forms that have a contrary message... Hardly objective
It is totally irrational to state that you have More support`for the position of the GWPF when they have thoroughly discredited. Thay have no scientists on staff: no research. They do nothing but publish statements for the media intended to discredit science and scientists. I do not need to discredit the source . It has no credit.
Every position has been discredited by detractors and simultaneously supported by proponents. In the end, what we do have is a geologic record that highlights multiple episodes of extreme climatic swings long before the presence of an anthropogenic inputs... That said, does humanity contribute to climate change in some form - sure we do, but in the scope of this issue, it's akin to sounding the alarm that the Atlantic ocean is drying up because I removed a tablespoon of water.
In the end, the record is clear in that humanity or not, the climate will still swing on it's heel regardless of all of the arm-flapping that goes on.
THere is only an overwhelming scientific consensus that the Planet is warming more rapidly than at any time in its existence and that Man is responsible for this. As I have said previously, there is not now a single peer reviewed paper that contradicts the fact of AGW. Not one. There have been perhaps half a dozen in total in the past four or five years - all published in vanity magazines and completely refuted.
Consensus? - Only at the 'true believers' meetings held in Cancun annually
Planet warming faster than any other time? - Here's a thought; how long have we had real records kept and how does that time frame compare to geologic time... Sorry, but that is a specious argument at best.
Man is responsible? - Who/what was responsible for the multiple episodes over the millenia?
Finally, Peer Review? - Please spare me on that. The IPCC and East Anglia have stripped away any value in that process (on this issue at least) with their fraudulent gaffes.
Do you seriously think that anyone wants this to be so? The world that the children or grandchildren of the participants in this forum will grow into will be a nightmare and it is the responsibility of us, all of us, to change that. Already, for just one example (and I could give you pages of others) there are fifty million climate refugees in this world. Within four or five decades, that figure will be in the hundreds of millions.
No sensationalism here.... Lemme guess, IF we don't engage a program of cap and trade, we will burn in a virtual hell on earth, eh?
