Quote:http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Glo...Foundation

Sourcewatch, funded by George Soros.  Yes, that's an unbiased resource.

 

It's funny how the alarmists get so defensive.  If the science is as settled as you warming folks believe, why should it bother you that it's being investigated.  I'd think that would be encouraged to validate the claim that global "warming" (conveniently rebranded "climate change" by the alarmists when the science that was settled suddenly indicated that the warming wasn't nearly as bad as Al Gore was claiming) is man made and that it's really happening at the alarming rate the hand wringers have claimed.

 

We hear constantly from the "experts" on global warming like Barry Obama telling us the science is settled.  His scientific credentials come from all those years of community organizing.  It gets hot out there apparently. 

 

Climate change happens. It gets  hotter.  It gets colder.  It's been documented that the science the alarmists were using as their benchmark was not entirely accurate, and in some cases manipulated or even misrepresented.  We should just ignore that because our dear ruler has declared the science settled.  There's nothing in it for him or his supporters, right? 

 

I don't see an issue with the science being questioned.  Science once declared the earth was flat.  That was disproved.  So, why is it unthinkable that this man made global warming theory might be invalid?  What does it hurt to research this to settle the science once and for all?  Nobody would be hurt by this political/religious movement being debunked, right?  Nobody like the hypocrites that live in the spotlight of this cause celeb like Al Gore, right?

---