>
I have been speaking with a number of the other presenters here in private. One of the speakers here claimed that there is no such thing as Global Warming.
Now, I want to repeat what he said: Not that the global weather is a complex, variable system, or that we cannot tell with a great deal of certainty the precise impact mankind has had, or we are unsure of what future results might be if do this or that. Rather, the claim that temperatures around the globe have simply not gone up.
I don’t even bother responding to these comments anymore. It is simply not worth my time to debate data. But it makes it impossible for me to take the rest of this person’s portfolio — Biotech! — seriously. How can I remotely think of putting money into a flawed logical system that ignores simple data? (And for those of you who insist that temps have not risen over the past century, I suggest you treat my portfolio the exact same way; better yet, do the opposite of what I do).
Regardless, there have been many quite interesting conversations both on and off the stage. That is what makes going to these conferences so worthwhile.
~~~
I wonder: How much is the inability to debate ideas hindered by a disagreement over simple factual data ? I don’t mean interpretation and opinion, I mean simple facts.
Have other societies run into this? What was their fates?
>
Previously:
Global Warming? What Evidence Do You Have? (November 17th, 2008)
Alaska is Melting . . . (December 28th, 2005)
What's been said:
Discussions found on the web: