The Strength of the Climate Change Argument

Australian Senator, Steve Fielding, decided to vote against his country's climate-change legislation. It seems a growing number of Australian politicians, scientists and citizens have their doubts on the science of human-caused global warming. Fortunately, the number of skeptics in The U.S. is growing as well, and they include Joanne Simpson.

'The number of skeptics, far from shrinking, is swelling. Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe now counts more than 700 scientists who disagree with the U.N. -- 13 times the number who authored the U.N.'s 2007 climate summary for policymakers. Joanne Simpson, the world's first woman to receive a Ph.D. in meteorology, expressed relief upon her retirement last year that she was finally free to speak "frankly" of her nonbelief.'

Please note my emphasis in the excerpt above.  Once again we get a glimpse of the global warmists' argument.  Get with the program, or else.  I don't know what might have happened had she spoken out before her retirement, but whatever it was, Ms. Simpson didn't want to risk it.  Clearly, the science of global warming is the science of coersion.  The global warmists are thugs, and a vote in favor of any legislation to fight global warming is an invitation to more thuggery.

There are scientific arguments against human-caused global warming.

Comments

[CaptDMO]

You're kidding right?
I mean, you're just trying to be polite, right?
Not only are there a plethora of valid rebuttals against the "dire"
consequences of anthro-carbon release, there are also a wad of so-called peer reviews, debunking the "false interpretations" in the "papers" that current presenters of the cap-and-trade Trojan Horse present as evidence that the sky is falling, and only cash generation via. "tributes" to the King and his court from the little people will save Ms. Pelosi's personal sedan chair transportation between California, Washington, and other points "critical" to "administrative concerns".

Hence- political pronouncements that "The debate is settled", followed by "We must act NOW (meaning a Friday afternoon),with 300 pages of "oh, by the way" added without review. Folks that are afforded the time to actually read the proposal seem to be saying "Heyyyyy....wait a second here!".

Gee, is there any "Sunset" review clause, you know, just in case (like Clinton Era assaults on the 2ND that proved unconstitutional)? Why not ma'am?