School district muzzles Al Gore

[kskiska]

The Federal Way School Board Tuesday night put the brakes on schools showing Al Gore’s global warming movie, “An Inconvenient Truth.”

The board required that an opposing view be presented in order for teachers to present the film. Board president Ed Barney said he’s received about a half-dozen complaints from parents that their child was taking the film as fact after viewing it at school.

“We have to ensure that our schools are not being used to politically indoctrinate anyone,” said board member Dave Larson. The board voted 3 to 0, with two members absent.

In “An Inconvenient Truth,” the former U.S. vice president is shown presenting a slide show around the country on the catastrophic dangers of climate change and his crusade to combat it. A number of the nation’s top climate scientists have given the film high marks for scientific accuracy.

But Larson pointed out two articles presenting counter-views. One is by journalist and author John Stossel, who writes that many scientists laugh at doomsday predictions by Gore and other environmentalists. Some scientists, Stossel writes, say the result of global warming may be benign.

more…
http://www.thenewstribune.com/news/updates/story/6317386p-5507803c.html

[phantom power]

1. Can somebody buy these people a clue...

that climate change is not a "political" subject. It's earth-science. Jesus, I don't know if I can bear any more of this 21st century social constructivism.

[harpboy_ak]

69. Board's web page is...

The board's web page is http://www.fwps.org/info/board/

[zonkers]

84. At the hotel bar 5 min. ago ( I had a coffee) three bubbas were still spewing the

"we have to fight them over t here so we dont have to fight them over here" mantra. These ignorant myopic, fear driven people are out there.

[Solon]

2. Uhm, presenting facts isn't indoctrination...

What the fuck is the opposing side anyways? "A Convenient Lie"?

[jollyreaper2112]

53. water

Water is wet! I want a second opinion!

[kimmerspixelated]

3. A major big thump on the head to those fuckheads!

THEY are the ones politicizng it. Whatya wanna bet they have big stock shares in big oil?
My God, how can people be so stupid?

[progressivebydesign]

24. I'm in the area, trust me.. their complaints are religion based.

They complain about anything in the schools here that does not support their views.

[superconnected]

77. Because they are republicans

Washington state has pockets of them all over the place. Luckily we're mostly blue though.

[momster]

4. Here in Montgomery County, MD

my 13 yr old brought home a form for me to sign before they can watch it because it's rated PG or PG 13. Fortunately, the Neocon Nannies are so busy getting their kkknickers in a twist over the new sex-ed program that Inconvenient Truth is slipping under the radar.

[rodeodance]

5. i imagine people will view it now that it is censored

[Megahurtz]

6. "Opposing View?"

What opposing view? It certainly won't be factual!

Jeez, are these people in heavy denial or what?

[Jackpine Radical]

10. Let 'em have their opposing-view film.

In fact, there's some old social-psych literature showing that a good, solid factual information piece is all the more effective when paired with a half-assed "opposing view."

The contrast between Stossel & Gore will be pretty obvious.

[Trillo]

20. Can we get an opposing view for 2+2=4?

Surely, the alternate view should be required, yes?

[Jackpine Radical]

26. Any Fundie worth his/her salt should be able to whip that view up

and have time over to do you a nice persuasive piece on flat-earth theory as a throw-in.

[noahmijo]

46. The Opposing view will call science "false" but you better believe the talking snake story or you're

gonna burn while some guy with goat horns pitchforks you in the ass repeatedly.

True Story. They told me so.

[shance]

7. What is the Federal Way School Board and how does one get on it?

n/t

[Quantess]

88. Federal Way is a city in Washington, south of Seattle and north of Tacoma.

One would become a school board member in Federal Way same as any other school district.

[poverlay]

8. I've read John Stossel and he is completely unreliable. If he is presented as the

best contrarian voice, then Gore's mere opinion should be accepted as fact. Stossel makes his money disagreeing with things that can't be proven to those who can't follow logic or understand extrapolation. Not to say he isn't occasionally right, but betting that he's wrong is a good way to make money...

[Jackpine Radical]

28. The difference between him & Gore should be obvious to any

half-bright 10 year old. I really wouldn't fear these guys, unless they get the rational views excluded entirely.

[gasperc]

60. I think his head is still fucked up

from when that wrestler whacked him in the head

[Barrett808]

9. And now a word from the Flat Earth Society...

...fair and balanced, dontcha know.

[MasonJar]

11. John Stossel? John, who are these scientists and what degrees

do they have? Congrats! The dead birds and the dead polar bears and the dead people can just be laid at all of the feet of you closemnded Neandrathals: John's, the Federal Way School Board's and of course, the big oil man himself, Georgie Porgie.

[wordpix]

73. these are straw scientists no doubt

[brentspeak]

12. More conservative calling for "balanced coverage" B.S.

There are not always two sides to an issue; all there is are the facts. Nothing more, nothing less. Conservatives managed to gradually take over our news media by claiming some bogus need for "balanced viewpoints", when, in fact, news isn't supposed to have "viewpoints".

[Beartracks]

99. News by definition is facts.

The argument concerning viewpoints is, I believe, rooted in journalists' CHOICE of which facts to present. So the right-wing argument re. Iraq war coverage, for example, is that news organizations CHOOSE to mainly present the "bad" facts (violence, etc.) and few "good" facts (rebuilding efforts). That choice, in conservative theory, is driven by the "liberal media bias." To counter this perceived bias, conservative outlets have perfected "infotainment" and opinion-driven "journalism" which is based in mass-market consumerism.

[bamacrat]

13. You need an alternate POV when deciding to believe a claim, or support mythical beings...

but not when it comes to scientific data, and even pictures that show how much the glaciers and ice caps have melted away. Americans today are way too stupid.

[Catch22Dem]

14. Why do I picture the opposing view being something like "Reefer Madness?"

Seems about right.

[jdadd]

18. I misread you at first.....

I thought you said freeper madness :rofl:

[Catch22Dem]

44. Oh well. Pretty much the same.

;)

[mvd]

15. Um, it IS fact

:eyes:

[GoddessOfGuinness]

52. But it's so inconvenient.

:(
We want our children to grow up with their heads in the sand.

[fob]

16. "Some scientists, Stossel writes..." OK, that's good enough for me!

If you put "some scientists" and "john fuckstick stossel" in the SAME sentence it must be true!

Some DUers, FOB writes, say john stossel is a fucking asshole of the highest order.

[Uncle Joe]

101. I have to disagree, some scientists say

John Stossel is a fucking asshole of the lowest order and believe he and Geraldo Rivera should both be in professional wrestling as water boys to keep our champions cool during the breaks.

[BR_Parkway]

17. So the same people claiming no scientific accuracy want Jeebus

and the 10 Commandmants taught, Creationism and all the rest of the faith based agenda, right? Just trying to keep up with the hypocrisy. Some days it's really confusing.

[aggiesal]

33. What cracks me up ...

... is when I ask the fundies, for what religion was the 10 Commandments written?
100% always answer Christians.

When I tell the WRONG. They were written for the Jews, and Moses lived
1500 years before Christ was born.

They then stick their fingers in their ears, and go "NaNaNaNaNa ..., I can't hear you."

[depakid]

19. These board members need to be recalled

ANY school official who cites a known liar like Stossel in support of their position does not belong in a capacity to oversee education. If I were a parent in that district, I'd seriously be pissed that the anti-science crowd holds sway on the Board.

I wonder if these idiots even bother to look at their own mountains. Or read the Seattle papers.

State's shrinking glaciers: Going ... going ... gone?
Nov 1, 2006

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003334195_glacier01m.html

[NYC Liberal]

21. IDEA: Let's call up or write the school district demanding an "opposing view" for the "claim" that

the Earth is flat! See what they say about that.

I mean, as long as we're presenting alternatives to fact...

[against all enemies]

22. The truth is inconvenient, to idiots.

[progressivebydesign]

23. I live near there. People here in this area are SO narrow minded!!

One teacher at our local school has been able to show the film, though I'm certain that parents complained about it. There are so many wingnuts in this area. It's not exactly Seattle when it comes to intelligence, open mindedness, and sophistication. This is born-again Christian land, and most in my area do not believe that global warming is caused by anything but God. The schools are very much impacted by the mega churches here, and they have a very unhealthy alliance. I guarantee that the folks who complained did so on religious grounds. .

[olddad56]

25. "result of global warming may be benign." ....

and they may not be. ( giving the psychos the benefit of the doubt). Is the life of the planet, and subsequently our lives, something we should gamble with?

[Harper_is_Bush]

27. This is completely bizarre. Is that a backwards redneck-type burb? n/t

[progressivebydesign]

41. Believe it or not, it's a nice suburb between Tacoma and Seattle.

Many people there are retired military, military officers, lots of born again Christians and republicans.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

29. Idiots.

:dunce: :dunce: :dunce:

[confludemocrat]

30. An "opposing view" has to be a credible opposing view, and there are none

so this is lame to put it mildly

[nolabels]

55. But you would be safe to bet any amount of money.......................

that if the right did have a credible opposing view, then you would hear it pitched in your ear on a 24/7 basis from all the media whores till evidence proved otherwise. (sort of like what is happening now :shrug: )

[wordpix]

74. opposing view=God created the snow & ice & seasons in 6 days, no matter glaciers & polar ice caps

are melting.

[xchrom]

31. fundies doing what fundies do best -- fling shit at everybody else

thereby making them dance to their tune.

[JNelson6563]

32. I'm sure Mobile Oil has a propaganda film

the school could show for the counter-point.

Julie

[Harper_is_Bush]

34. Yeah no shit! What exactly is the "opposing view" they can show?

this makes my blood boil.

[ShockediSay]

35. Lobbies DO some heavy duty "think tank" funding

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=abramoff+article+%22think+tank%22&btnG=Google+Search

[wordpix]

75. Exxon Mobil funds think tanks, too. AEI is one of them

[yellowcanine]

36. Stossel is a "journalist"? In a pig's eye!

[buddysmellgood]

37. He's a shill

[yellowcanine]

79. Correct. And a particularly whiny annoying one, imo. Someone really should investigate

what happened with Stossel. He started out as a fairly hard hitting if somewhat naive consumer reporter. Then, overnight it seems, he started shilling for corporate America. He has never really explained the change. The other question is why ABC gives him so much leeway to present one-sided reports on serious issues like global warming?

[YankeyMCC]

38. Do they insist on the "opposing view" on the question of Gravity? nt

[0rganism]

39. political indoctrination? Hell, I got PLENTY of that in the public schools

D.A.R.E.? no opposing viewpoint

Righteousness of American imperialism and expansionism in the 18-20th centuries? no opposing viewpoint

Appropriateness of capitalist/monetarist economic policies? no opposing viewpoint

Gratuitous use of classtime to support the school's football team? no opposing viewpoint

Daily pledge of allegiance required? no opposing viewpoint

I could go on and on. Plenty of room for counterpoint, but those of us who tried know where that got us.

As far as science goes, I betcha the frogs we dissected in biology would have liked to present an opposing viewpoint, too, if they'd had the time and resources to prepare one. Some things just don't get their due consideration; I can live with that even if the frogs couldn't.

But when it comes to global climate change, and objections of an obviously-biased "journalist" are given equal standing to those of leading climatologists... well, we have to draw the proverbial line in the sand. Don't want to "politically indoctrinate" the kids? I'm not impressed.

[EndElectoral]

40. Stoessel's a Disney shill...just like his scientists paid by Exxon

[Zorra]

42. Opposing view: Continual environmental pollution is a good thing.

How fucking stupid are these people anyway?

Oh, yeah - they're republicans.

Here's what Larson should do if he needs more evidence of global warming: He should go to a small room, close all the doors and windows in the room, run a pipe from his car exhaust system into the room, turn his car on, and wait in there until it gets really hot and he can't breathe anymore.

If he survives, he'll may change his mind about the dangers of chemical environmental pollution and global warming. OTOH, he is a republican, so he might not learn anything.

[hootinholler]

43. The Federal Way school board?

How, um, fitting.

-Hoot

[noahmijo]

45. Well I totally saw the danger that this movie can do to the young minds

it bears the danger of teaching them while they're young the importance of conservation (the conservatives of this country still need a dictionary everytime that word comes up) it might teach them to not be so wasteful, might teach them to just buy a car to get them around and that the SUV is only necessary if you camp every weekend with a family of 10 and require something for those hilly snowy slopes, it might teach the young ones to volunteer to help recycle or pick up waste-in other words it might drive a few kids to try to do something to help the planet.


Don't you people see the hateful anti-jesus anti-American pro commie crap these poor innocent kids will be spoonfed???

I demand children only be allowed to watch Pat Roberton talk about assassinating foreign leaders so they learn the true values of Christ our Lord and Patriotism!!

[NotGivingUp]

47. our educational system is where the brainwashing begins. it's time to stop

lying to the children about what is, what has been, and what will be.

[Bigmack]

48. Will somebody PLEASE tell me an opposing video?

I've run into this bullshit "both sides" argument in my area.

Does anybody know of an "opposing view" video that's anywhere near scientific.... or even nowhere near scientific?

[WindRavenX]

49. I think Michael Chriton (sp?) has a video produced with Big Oil

So yeah, there isn't any scientific opposing view.

I think it's funny that people think they can have opinions that are based on complete horseshit-- you're entitled to your own opinions, but people, you aren't entitled to your own facts.

[sakabatou]

50. The stupid! It burns!

[Doremus]

51. The world's best scientists vs. a media whore? Gee, lemme think about that...

John Stossel's mustache is always well-trimmed.

As good a credential as the fundies need I guess.

Idiots.

[Towelie]

54. Misleading headline. Nobody is "muzzling" anyone.

"The board required that an opposing view be presented in order for teachers to present the film."

That is reasonable, rational, and exactly what I would expect any board to do. This is a place of education, the point is to show them the whole issue, and the logic or lack thereof behind each argument for and against.

They're providing dissenting opinions to foster student debate and critical thinking, and also as a means of alleviating the concerns of some parents that their students education might be one-sided. They pay taxes too ya know.

Introducing students to both sides will allow them to better understand the issue, understand why it's such a big issue, know the arguments and reasoning behind opposing opinions, and to help formulate real, practical, and agreeable solutions. This is the knowledge that ANY person would need to effectively win a debate for their cause.

I would much rather our students know what they're dealing with, rather than to be caught off-guard when they get to the real world. That would, at best, be embarrassing for the student, at worst, disillusioning and mind-changing.

[Nihil]

57. Well they are certainly not using a level playing field ...

> They're providing dissenting opinions to foster student debate and
> critical thinking ...

No they aren't.

They are preventing facts from being presented unless opposing opinions
are given equal time.

Promoting the message that "Climate change is a matter of opinion" is a
very BAD thing to be teaching children.

I think it is perfectly fair to describe this bias as "muzzling" but,
there again, I'm neither funded by Big Oil nor a BAC ... just a concerned
passenger on this over-stressed planet ...

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

58. I don't know. Peter Parker's enhanced hearing detected a faint "hmmmph-hmmmph" sound.

Besides that, wavy lines are coming out of his head:

[progressivebydesign]

67. You're joking, right? Both sides???? ?

Umm... that's ridiculous. THis is not a debate. There is no debate, save for a handful of industry-funded hacks or curmodgeonly egoists. You honestly believe that EVERY science presentation at school be BALANCED with opposing views? This isn't a school debate. It's science.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

106. Nope. It's called "False Balance"

It's like giving the Flat Earth Society an equal say with NASA regarding a new satellite launch. (www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=218)
And I agree with Mr. Parker above.

(On edit; you'd think I'd have gotten the post right the first time instead of making three edits)

[bunkerbuster1]

109. AKA "Teaching the controversy."

Doonesbury nailed this on Sunday.

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/dailydose/index.html?uc_full_date=20070114

[flamingyouth]

56. What a bunch of crap

:eyes:

[TZ]

59. stossel is a fool

When did this guy get a phD in science. There are ALWAYS opposing viewpoints to scientific theories (yes Global warming is a "theory" but a widely accepted theory, much like evolution. People hear theory and think not proven which is not really correct...). I love the way that people like this think that if 100 scientists believe a theory is correct but 3 or 4 don't then its controversial. People like Bush also go out of their way to find people who disagree. And being in the field and having dealt with this nonsense, its highly likely the people who disagree have a political agenda in doing so...:grr:

[michaelwb]

61. Opposing views, huh?

*sarcasm*

Darn tooting. It's patently unfair only presenting one point of view just because the majority of people share it.

I'm tired of schools being biased with there anti-cannibalism agendas, just because most people support it.

I demand opposing views be presented.

People - the other, other, other white meat.

*sarcasm*

[noonwitch]

62. Stossel should make his own movie, the kids can watch both

and they can discuss the merits of both ideas in class. It would be good for them to do it that way.

I really don't see how anyone can deny global warming at this point. Whether it's the melting of glaciers, or the water-level decline in the Great Lakes, there are signs of it everywhere.

[Roland99]

63. Yeah, those charts aren't filled with *scientific facts*. Nope, not at all.

freakin' morans

[Roland99]

64. And, ya know what? I bet if they showed the 10 Commandments with Charlton Heston and...

the kids came home taking that Moses parted the Red Sea as fact they'd have NO problem with it!


:mad:

[TZ]

65. the same bunch

this is probably the same group of people who think that evolution has not been proved, ignoring all the data, while telling us they know absolutely every word in the Bible is the truth with no proof...:crazy:

[paparush]

66. "Opposing View" - We all live on the big rock candy mountain where

the lemonade springs and the blue bird sings..

[progressivebydesign]

68. Just read: Parents were upset that their kids were quoted it as FACT.

It upset almost a dozen parents in Federal Way. BECAUSE their teens believed the movie had FACTS in it! Oh.. the horror! The kids believed the science! :wtf: No, seriously, that was the reason the parents complained. Because the teens came home and talked about the film as "though it was factual". Idiot parents.

[WindRavenX]

71. yup, that's probably the worst part

God forbid we teach our kids science...:eyes:


Boy, I can't wait for this type of crap when I start teaching HS biology...

[Missy Vixen]

70. This is a solid-gold reason why all DU'ers

need to start running for the school board in their respective communities. If you possibly can, DO IT. The right has stacked school boards all over the country with far right wing wackos like the above. Many of these seats have been held for years and years because nobody else files for them when they're up for election.

It's a thankless commitment, but it's time for all of us to break the stranglehold the right has had on public schools for at least the last fifteen years.

Julie

[wordpix]

72. tell the "global warming is benign" BS to drought-stricken Africans & Inuit who can't hunt on the

icepack anymore. :puke:

[PittPoliSci]

76. but it is fact...

morons.

[Guaranteed]

78. So science = politics. now. nt

[Taoschick]

82. It's absurd to believe there are no politics involved

There are politics involved on both sides.

[donco6]

80. Shhh, don't tell anyone. ..

but we've been showing it here for months. No complaints yet.

[Mikey929]

81. Fairness Doctine

If you believe in the Fairness Doctrine, as most on here seem to, then what is so wrong about hearing from scientists who do not subcribe to Gore's view? You can't just demand the Fairness Doctrine when you want to get your message out; it means the other guy has a right to get his message out too. There are scientists out there who dispute Gore's views. Surely you're not demanding that children only be given one side of the story.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

83. There aren't scientists who don't subscribe to Al Gore's "view."

Should we give equal time to holocaust denial in history class?

[Mikey929]

85. Of course not

Obviously, anything presented in a school science class should have a solid basis in scientific fact. That being said, there are of course reputable scientists who disagree with Al Gore. Not trying to pick a fight, but you can't seriously contend that every single reputable scientist in the world agrees with Gore. A few months back, Pete DuPont did an article citing scientists who take differing positions on the issue.

I'm just saying if there are two sides (or three) that are based in fact, they should both be presented. You've apparently concluded that there can be no reasonable disagreement with Al Gore, and I disagree with that.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

86. ...

"there are of course reputable scientists who disagree with Al Gore."

No, there aren't. Not anymore then there are reputable historians who disagree with the holocaust.

"You've apparently concluded that there can be no reasonable disagreement with Al Gore, and I disagree with that."

You're welcome to disagree, but you won't find any science or reputable scientists to support your opinion.

[Mikey929]

87. Awfully sure

That's a pretty strong position to take to say that not a single reputable scientist in the entire world disagrees with Al Gore, and I would go even further to say that you are wrong on that point. I've read articles citing scientists who profess disagreement. Whether they are correct or not in their view, I have no idea. I'm not a climate specialist. But I know they are out there.

And to be clear I'm talking about many things -- not just the fact that there is global warming, but also how much, its causes, whether it is man-made or natural, what effect it will have on the earth, whether Kyoto would have any effect, etc. You are saying that not a single reputable scientist disagrees with Gore. That's just not the case.

To analogize to the Holocaust is simply illogical. Millions of people personally witnessed the events of the Holocaust. It is verified that it happened. Global warming is a scientific model which is in constant flux as we learn more about it. You can't equate a scientific model with an actual event.

I just read Bill Bryson's The History of Everything. He cites to climate scientists who say that there is so little actually known about how and why the climate is the way it is, that it is very hard to make any accurate predictions about it.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

89. That's because I pay attention to the issue.

The issue is even addressed in Al Gore's own the Inconvenient Truth, for instance. Out of some 800 random selected scientific peer-reviewed articles on the subject, not one questions the validity of global warming. If these "reputable scientists who question global warming" aren't publishing peer-reviewed articles on the subject, then they ain't reputable scientists.

"I would go even further to say that you are wrong on that point."

Yeah, you alread said you disagreed. But you haven't backed it up.

"To analogize to the Holocaust is simply illogical. Millions of people personally witnessed the events of the Holocaust. It is verified that it happened"

Yeah, and there are thousands of peer-reviewed scientific articles verifying global warming. It's ridiculous to question either.

Billy Bryson? The humorist?

:rofl:

[Mikey929]

90. Cite

Wikipedia actually has a lengthy explanation of the issue, specifically naming published scientists who disagree with the consensus view. Again, I don't know if they're right or not. But the article gives a detailed description of the scientists and their views, i.e., don't believe in global warming; believe the earth is warming but we don't know the cause; believe the earth is warming but it is natural and not man-made; believe the earth is warming but believe it will help the earth, etc. And the article references a number of other published articles and studies. It is a minority view, but it is out there.

Look, I'm not trying to fight. But it is simply wrong to say there are no reputable scientists out there who disagree with Gore. There are. Go the Wikipedia article and read it for yourself. I googled "global warming debate" and it was one of the first sites listed.

Again, I'm not saying these people are right. But can't we agree that some scientists disagree with Al Gore? Why is that so hard to admit?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

92. Wikipedia, eh?

:rofl:

Alright, which scientists are we talking about, be specific.

"But can't we agree that some scientists disagree with Al Gore?"

No. No reputable scientists disagree with Al Gore on his scientific statements expressed in An Inconvenient Truth.

Now, there are people with scientific degrees that are being paid by oil companies to disagree with Al Gore. But they're not any more reputable than the white supremacist historians who disagree with the holocaust.

I'm sorry, am I being inconvenient?

:rofl:

[Mikey929]

93. Sorry

Sorry, I didn't write down every single name to pass it on to you. I gave you my google search, I gave you the Wikipedia cite, and I gave you the Pete DuPont article from this past summer. If you want the names, please do a couple minutes of Internet search and they will be right there. If you don't want to bother, that's your call. But the information is out there if you want it.

Again, I wasn't asking you to admit that Gore is wrong, only that there are some reputable scientists who disagree with him. I still don't know why that is so hard to admit. There IS scientific debate on the subject even if you don't want to admit it.

Your refusal to admit a simple fact tells me that you are a devout believer in the church of Al Gore and are as immutable in your views as the staunchest born again R-winger. There's nothing wrong with acknowleding that there is a minority view on a scientific debate. Under your reasoning, everyone who disagrees with you is automatically not reputable, or being paid off by Big Oil. Enjoy your self-righteousness.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

95. LOL

Every single name?

Mikey, you haven't given me one single name of reputable scientist.


You've given me Pete Du Pont's name, sure. But he's a loony columnist for the WSJ, somebody who's been thoroughly debunked, somebody who gets his money from, you guessed it, oil companies.

"There IS scientific debate on the subject even if you don't want to admit it."

No, there isn't. If you've got any, let me see it.

"Your refusal to admit a simple fact tells me that you are a devout believer in the church of Al Gore and are as immutable in your views as the staunchest born again R-winger."

And do you know what your utter failure to backs up your claims tells me? Guess.

[Mikey929]

94. Generous Mood

I decided to help you out a little and give you some specific names of scientists who do not subscribe to the consensus view. These are from the Wikipedia site. If you go there, you will see summaries of these scientists' positions along with links to external sources, articles, reports, etc. It's interesting reading if you have the time. They don't all have the same opinions, of course, but I edited for length just to give you the names and where they are from. Enjoy!


Chris de Freitas, Associate Professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science at The University of Auckland, New Zealand.

Claude Allègre, French geophysicist, Institute of Geophysics (Paris):

Robert C. Balling, Jr., director of the Office of Climatology and an associate professor of geography at Arizona State University:

David Deming, University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs

Richard Lindzen, MIT meteorology professor and member of the National Academy of Sciences:

Roy Spencer, principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville:

Sallie Baliunas, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics:

Robert M. Carter, researcher at the Marine Geophysical Laboratory at James Cook University in Australia:

George V. Chilingar, professor of civil and petroleum engineering at the University of Southern California, and Leonid F. Khilyuk:

William M. Gray, professor of atmospheric science and meteorologist, Colorado State University:

Zbigniew Jaworowski, chair of the Scientific Council at the Central Laboratory for Radiological Protection in Warsaw:

Marcel Leroux, former Professor of Climatology, Université Jean Moulin:

Tim Patterson <20>, paleoclimatologist and Professor of Geology at Carleton University in Canada.

Frederick Seitz, retired, former solid-state physicist, former president of the National Academy of Sciences:

Nir Shaviv, astrophysicist at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem:

Fred Singer, Professor emeritus of Environmental Sciences at the University of Virginia:

Willie Soon, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics:

Henrik Svensmark, Danish National Space Center:

Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, Professor Emeritus from University of Ottawa:

Sherwood Idso, President Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, formerly a research physicist at the USDA Water Conservation Laboratory and adjunct professor Arizona State University:

Khabibullo Ismailovich Abdusamatov, Doctor of physics and mathematics, researcher at Pulkovskaya Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences and the supervisor of the Astrometria project of the Russian section of the International Space Station:

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

96. "Sallie Baliunas"

See, now, Mikey.

I just took a random name off of your list, googled it, and it turns out this "reputable scientist" has been working with a number of conservative think tanks such as the American Enterprise Institute, the Heritage Foundation, and other such organizations that get their money from Exxon-Mobil

If I look into the other names on the list, do you think I'll find other such conflicts of interest? Did you look into it yourself before posting?

Maybe you should have.

[Mikey929]

100. Google

No I did not google every single name on the entire list. But let me know when you do. You can debunk every single name on the list if you care to. So by your analogy, every scientist who is on the liberal side of things should be disbelieved because they're not objective? That's what you seem to be saying about anyone who may be associated with the Heritage Foundation. I hope that reasoning goes both ways.

I just find it a little scary when one side of any scientific debate takes such a position where they can't even ackowledge the possibility that there might be an opposing viewpoint.

Also, why is Pete Dupont loony? Because he may raise legitimate questions about your conclusions? That's some good circular reasoning.

[mvd]

102. The sampling given in An Inconvenient Truth..

has a wide range of scientists. It is true that any scientists who deny global warming have not been peer reviewed. That is a fact. Now there are some pure meteorologists/climatologists who are skeptics, but they don't focus specifically on the issue and have not put their ideas up for scrutiny. According to this page, the The American Meteorological Society does say there is good evidence for global warming.

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

[Mikey929]

103. Thanks

Thanks for the link. I like how the author admits that the consensus might be wrong, and recommends humility in any scientific endeavor. Well said, and apparently above the capacity of some other posters on here who refuse to even ackowledge the possibility that they could be wrong. That is nothing but religious fundamentalism with a liberal spin.

I am troubled by the majority view's opinion that global warming is "likely" a result of greenhouse gasses. Isn't scientific methodology supposed to go beyond something just being likely? It's like saying, "Odds are it's being caused by the gasses." But the truth is -- no one can be sure at all because it cannot be tested with any scientific methodology. It simply can't be.

Also, the evidence says most of Europe used to be covered with huge ice sheets. They obviously melted as the result of the Earth warming. But how did the Earth warm up if there were no evil corporations spewing gasses into the air? Aren't warming and cooling trends part of nature?

[WindRavenX]

108. yes, warming and cooling periods are natural

They relate to how our sun, a variable sun, has either high/low amounts of activity. Right now we're in a hot cycle, true. However, this does not explain the high levels of Co2 that we are seeing.

[goforit]

91. Mr. Larson? I hope the first tidal wave carries you away!

[Cha]

97. YEah, don't expose the kids to scientific

knowledge, you fucking neanderthals. The fucking Earth is flat, too..doncha just feel it?!!

On the bright side, I donated a copy of "An Inconvenient Truth" today to my Library and the Head Librarian was thrilled! :D

I feel bad for the kids just because the adults are fubared.

[katty]

98. apparently, Gore's doc is very inconvenient - Truth always is

[NotGivingUp]

104. we must not let the children know the truth. we must not allow the children

to use their ability to think for themselves. 'WE' will tell the children what to think. 'WE' will teach the children how to get along in the society that 'WE' create. 'WE' will have control of the children by keeping their parents so busy working that they will not have the time to instill any strength of character, individualist traits, or encourage any critical thinking skills.

[lonestarnot]

105. And with this they think their children won't learn of this inconvenient truth?

HMMMMFFF!

[darkism]

107. Global warming is political indoctrination now?

I was in grade school in the early 90's just as environmental awareness was picking up and long before these nutty extremist wingers came on the scene. Global warming was always presented as the fact it is and we were encouraged to go home and do our part to help the planet.

[SharonRB]

110. WTF?

This is not political indictrination! It's science. Some people just don't get it, and they make me crazy.

[MasonJar]

111. The arrogance of ignorance personified.