On Jul 30, 10:51?am, wrote:
On Jul 30, 11:48 am, Chuck Gould wrote:

Unfortunately with the revelations about temperature monitoring
stations around the country being "ooops" set up next to generators,
too close to the pavement, up against buildings, etc. All "mistakes"
which make for innacuracies, almost always to the hot side, a lot of
this stuff seems much more sinister than one might think. I just
caught the end of the story, but apparently the agency in charge of
monitoring these sites has removed their locations from the public
arena as news agencies were finding a lot of problems across the board
and they like most GW advocates, don't want to be monitored or
challenged. You have scientists calling for other scientists to lose
their right to teach for doubting, what is proving to be a shady
industry all around. Could be the biggest scam since Y2K, but we are
not allowed to question, or even look.

If this is a conspiracy, it's a global conspiracy. How odd to think
that sex, food, and a promoting a phony global warming conspiracy are
the only three things than people from every country and continent can
seem to agree upon. Were all of the temperature monitors on Earth
placed too near to buildings, or in places where they would likely get
hot readings? If so, wow! Wish we could cooperate that effectively for
some more worthy causes.

What about empirical evidence? How can we ignore the rapid
disappearance of the arctic ice cap and the all but universal
recession of glaciers world wide? Were the arctic ice cap and glaciers
"placed too near a building?"

One side or the other is being used, by somebody, in this global
warming debate. Why do I doubt that "liberals" have enough money to
buy off the majority of climate scientists on the planet, but find it
slightly more credible that BIG OIL with a mega-billion PR budget can
exert substantial influence over the broadcast companies that own
Limbaugh and some of the others? Why is it that the American
Association of Petroleum Geologists is the *only* scientific body to
take a formal stand denying the existence of global warming?
*Geologisits* fer crissake, not even climatologists.

I'm not in a position to make any authoritative or absolute
pronouncements on the global warming issue, nor are 99% of the people
on the planet regardless of how fervently they adhere to a personal
opinion. But I'd be willing to be there's a lot more going on here
than "the liberals placed all the temperature sensors too close to
buildings". :-)

If some professors are trying to get other professors fired because
they
won't teach that "global warming is here now and is a serious threat",
that's wrong. Providing that the deniers sincerely believe their
message and aren't simply getting paid, of course. I am forced to
smile, slightly, because that's the exact situation that *tenure* is
supposed to protect.
Some of my less than liberal friends have been known to go on a rant
against "liberal professors" and call for an end to the tenure system
so that it would be easier to fire college profs who present ideas my
less than liberal friends disagree with. Well, lookie here......most
of those same less than liberal friends are very skeptical or in
denial about global warming ("has to be bogus if Al Gore has an
opinion on it"), and in the end it will be that same tenure system
that preserves the jobs of
their less than liberal colleagues on campus.