The Associated Press: UN climate chief says hacked e-mails are damaging


The article says:

The top UN climate official says hacked e-mails from climate scientists that appear to cast doubt on their research do look bad, but studies of global warming are solid.

Really? Were the studies done by the “scientists” of University of East Anglia, a bunch of self-serving job preservationists, also “solid” until it was revealed that they’re not quite as solid as a Jello Pudding Pop in the Sahara?

And I have another question for you: When you write a paper or a study, don’t you quote other sources to bolster your conclusions? That’s what I learned to do in college. So were the conclusions of these U of EA “scientists” cited elsewhere? And how many of those papers were cited? Are they all therefore “solid?”

How many other “scientists” will have to redouble their efforts to cover up their own “work” and “research” now that a few of the cards in this tenuous house of cards have fallen?

Look, I’ve got nothing against energy conservation, greenhouse gas emissions reductions, etc., but we don’t need a cadre of money-grubbing Al Gore sycophants to invent a reason at our expense to conserve what God gave us. We should be doing that just because we’re supposed to be good stewards of the Earth and all that is in it.

(An excellent treatise on our responsibility to God to take care of His creation can be found in this article by J. Patrick Dobel.)

Recent Comments