Global warming is not caused by humans. Movies like Day After Tomorrow and Waterworld are fiction. They're impossible. If the worlds ice melted, Memphis (or the near viscinity) would be oceanfront property Once people begin to understand these concepts, the world will be better off. I guess they're going to say California is falling into the ocean next.

Once again you quote think tanks with their own agenda steeped in abject corporatism. The Hoover Institution is a conservative and libertarian public policy think tank and library founded by Herbert Hoover at Stanford University, his alma mater. Some of its fellows have connections to the Bush administration. Most of its funding is from "charitable" foundation that are mostly shills for companies such as:
Archer Daniels Midland Foundation
ARCO Foundation
Boeing-McDonnell Foundation
Chrysler Corporation Fund
Dean Witter Foundation
Exxon Educational Foundation
Ford Motor Company Fund
General Motors Foundation
J.P. Morgan Charitable Trust
Merrill Lynch & Company Foundation
Procter & Gamble Fund
Rockwell International Corporation Trust
Transamerica Foundation
all of whom have vested interests in denying the realities of non-sustainable development. Meanwhile, you ignore the fact that the most prestigious general science journal in the USA, SCIENCE, takes global warming very seriously and recently devoted an entire issue to REAL science about the issue.

Junk science? You mean like that crap you linked to from Thomas Gale Moore? Here are some links to critiques of Moore's junk science: http://home.att.net/~rpuchalsky/sci_env/moore/moore_warming.html though I doubt that you or your small audience of deluded fellow kool aid drinkers will bother to investigate.

29% and falling, Jason. But I guess, like Dubya, from your perch everything looks just ducky.

29% and falling, well, let's see, considering that Congress is still far behind the President in terms of public opinion, and way behind Kerry, Kennedy and Gore. I guess I'm backing the right guy, if you let public opinion be your judge.

As for the Hoover Institute, I find their work a helluva lot better than Al Gore's "the sky is falling" rhetoric. In the 70's he said we had a decade before collapse, in the 80's it was still a decade, in the 90's it became decades (plural) and now in the 00's it's some decades (plural indeterminate), that's the problem with predicting the end of times, you get proven wrong again and again and again.

The global warming crowd consists of luddites who wish for the sky to fall. I assume you're one of those.

I'll take my Hoover Institute report over your collection of equally (if not more so) partisan links. As for the companies you listed, I'm a fan of almost each and every one of them, and their charitable foundations. You expose your bias when you rail against the companies who built America and who do far more to advance the causes of man than your luddite friends.

But thanks for reading, stopping by and whining.

Global warming is junk science based on flawed evidence and serving a political adgenda. If you want to chase "non-sustainable" development, go after China. Somehow though, I think they can do little ill in your eyes.

But I am curious, are you suggesting that the planet hasn't experienced periods of warming before that were unrelated to man? Are you suggesting that the Sun isn't on a particularly hot clip right now???

As for the magazine Science, calling that "the most prestigeous journal in the USA, is quite the joke, do you use that at parties??? It's an advertiser supported MAGAZINE, Gilman, it's not a peer reviewed prestigeous scientific "journal". Nice try, save it for parties.

--Jason

I'm also guessing that since now you have taken issue with not only Conservatives and Libertarians, that only the liberal viewpoint is valid in your world view.

You can have that libby viewpoint all you like, it's unsuccessful, prone to failure and generally rejected by rational thinking people in the real world.

Save liberalism for the ivory towers (the only place it works), the rest of us will continue to do the work for you and busy ourselves with getting on with real science and not political pseudo(junk)-science.

--Jason

Now, Jaosn. We start discussing one issue and suddenly I am a People's Republic supporter, though in fact it could be argued that autocratic unbridled corporatism a la China and the death of free speech is exactly the model that the current administration covets.

But that is what you do. Hit a blind alley and then throw some blatantly ridiculous accusation at your antagonist, plus the usual tired labels of "libby" this and that. Oh, and luddite, too. I am amused to think of myself as a luddite. I am willing to bet that I have more scientific and technological credentials than you can imagine.

Be that as it may, the ads in Science by-and-large target working scientists and are mostly for lab equipment, lab consumables, and reagents. Professional journals that don't take advertisments are either published by commercial presses or run by professional societies. They charge up to $1000 per page to publish between their covers. I'll take useful advertising and no page charges any day.

So, thanks for letting me stop by and "whine." I won't darken your door any further. You just continue to get your bellweather stats from Fox News, to believe that you are in step with the American majority and that the right wing nightmare will continue for another election cycle (assuming that it's an honest one).

I'm the one who hit a "blind alley"? Very odd, considering that you were the one who brought up the Presidents public opinion polls and don't put them in context with public opinion of the other branches of government which are considerably lower. But I'm the one entering the "blind" areas? Yeah, right.

As for China? Unbridled corporatism? More buzz words that don't have any relation to the subject. China is far from "unbridled", it's intricately linked to the direction and orders of the Communist State, your characterizations are simply incorrect.

As for Science, the magazine, you contended that it was the "most prestigeous general science journal in the USA" which is only true in your warped worldview, it is merely one of many, a for-profit magazine owned by a non-profit, it's a mouthpiece for an organization, very little else. It's not a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and it's hardly the "most prestigeous" in the nation. Sure it's got it's fans, but it's not the end all be all, especially when it bends over backwards to devote an entire issue to supporting the false premises of a failed political candidate as a run-up for his coming movie. Get real, Ed, Louis or whomever you really are, perhaps if you kept to one email address and one nom de guerre I'd take you more seriously, but when when you keep changing your name and email, I can only consider that you are a troll, and a poor one at that.

You obviously are an anti-capitalist luddite, you're also the one who started flinging around Conservative, Neocon, Republican, Libertarian, Right-Wing and other labels first. It obviously hurts you more than it does me when labels are applied to the views you are espousing via talking points lifted from your political peers.

As for the "majority" we'll just leave that to the only determination of majority that really counts, elections, which your side of the aisle has ad particular trouble in winning the last few decades, yes, you had Clinton, and you can thank Perot for that one, but don't start claiming that you're suddenly in the majority until your side starts winning a majority of the national elections. M'Kay??

--Jason

PS, and yes, from my perch, things are quite ducky, we've got a great economy, low unemployment, a fantastic military success record of late, more minority ownership and investment than ever before, gas prices are still historically low, and we've weathered horrific attacks, storms and more and come up swinging and stronger for it. I'm sorry you see the "end of times" everywhere, but I'm an optimist and a realist, I'm not living in a constant state of denial and cowering away hoping that sky will fall.

Good Day, Louis, Ed, or whomever you wish to play at being today.

-JC