Thread: Al Gore, Global Warming, And The Burden Of Proof

Originally Posted by John L

In answer to your very short and concise post,.......Perhaps, yes, yes, no, sometimes, only time will tell, sometimes, and I don't think so.

Just kidding.

One thing.



Obviously you are relying upon the well disproven, and I am talking about absolute proof, Hockey Stick graph. It's a fraud, and only the intellectually dishonest, or intellectually lazy, still rely upon it. Incidentially, even the IPCC no longer uses it, and conveniently left it out of their last biased assessment.

Let me ask for your kind patience and take the time to read the following about the Hockey Stick episode.

The "Hockeystick" : The Global Warming Scandal of the Decade,By Michael R. Fox, Ph.D.

Breaking the “Hockey Stick”

And for some detailed, dry, and entirely bland science, you can go here and read all about the folly of the Hockey Stick. PDF:BIAS AND CONCEALMENT IN THE IPCC PROCESS:THE “HOCKEY-STICK” AFFAIR AND ITS IMPLICATIONS, by David Holland

And if you are only interested in a "Good Read" about it, try Orson Scott Card's account. He is a great Si Fi writer, so you will be able to enjoy his account of how the fraud was pushed on to us and how it was totally exposed by a fellow Canadian. All in a Good Cause, By Orson Scott Card

And since you are a "True Believer", it it likely that nothing will sway your faith. But If you are interested in getting ALL SIDES of the debate, let me suggest you journey to the Coyote Blog and read his thoughtful publication, Table of Contents: A Layman's Guide to Anthropogenic (Man-Made) Global Warming. He is not interested in bias and only wishes to bring out the truth.

Now, if you are a glutton for punishment, lastly you can go to my forum, Ai-Jane.org, and check out Accumulated Global Warming Skeptic's Guide. If that does not put you in to "Tilt" mode, nothing will.

Don't like my "hockey stick"? Are you saying the information it contains is not correct? if so, please point out (in your own words) how the graphs I posted are incorrect. Also, in your own words, let's have some simple yes/no answers to these two fundamental questions:

1) Do greenhouse gases contribute to global warming?
2) Has human activity dramatically increased the level of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere?
3) Are the poles melting?
4) Are sea levels rising?
5) Is desertification increasing?

But thanks for the links!

Originally Posted by John L

This is typical 'boiler plate' Collectivist Left Wing tactics. Rather than address the content of the message

With all due respect, you haven't addressed or refuted anything in my initial post, you've just posted some links.

Originally Posted by John L

Why don't you address the points?

Right, in your own words let's start with this exciting new idea:

Originally Posted by John L

the time honored policy of requiring proof of innocence from those who differ from his ideas of how the world should work. It's an elaborate scam

that theories don't need to be disproved with empirical data

Btw, what does "proof of innocence" mean? What does it have to do with science?

A simple, direct answer from you will suffice (not another link)

I'm interested in what you think and what theory and data it's based on.