Quote:
Originally Posted by gmeyers1944 Very good detective work. What I posted is indeed from "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming and Environmentalism", by Christopher C. Horner. I clicked on your link and I must admit that even if I were doubtful about Horner, I would be convinced that he is a credible source. |
If you are interested, here is an interesting review of his book for you to read that I found on Amazon:
"Chances are, if you want to read this book, you have already made your mind up that global warming is at best, a minor nuisance, and at worst, a leftist conspiracy to weaken America. You will not be disappointed. However, you will find a lot of information on the politics of global warming, and very little on the science behind the theory. If you are truly interested in understanding the contrarian point of view on global warming (that it's either not real, or insignificant), then I recommend reading a book with actual science and facts in it titled "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years", by Avery and Singer.
Avery and Singer are every bit as committed to "de-bunking" prevailing wisdom on global warming as this author, but they do not resort to name-calling and vague pronouncements. No, as scientists, they put forth their best evidence to prove their point of view. Although I interpret the scientific findings differently, I applaud their rigorous scientific approach. Save your money and time, and skip to the better book "Unstoppable Global Warming Every 1,500 Years".
If you have not already fossilized your point of view, and are willing to look at evidence that perhaps global warming is occurring, and may not be such a good thing (and therefore worth trying to reduce), I highly recommend "The Weather Makers" by Tim Flannery, and "With Speed and Violence, Why Scientists Fear Tipping Points in Climate Change" by Fred Pearce."
Amazon.com: Customer Reviews: The Politically...
Perhaps the Avery and Singer book is a better read if you wish to look at countering the man-made global warming conclusion from a much more scientific perspective.
Perhaps I'll give it a read myself...