Wait, you think that's cajones?

How about this.

The office of the President isn't part of the executive branch either.

I, for one, do NOT welcome our Texan overlord. :mad:

More reasons I do not buy into the whole man made global warming stuff.

Interesting info refuting many claims from Gore made in an inconvenient truth from a wide variety of sources.

Reasons that I'm skeptical of the op-ed piece that scaeagles linked to:

Some interesting information about the institute that the author of the piece works for, from a wide variety of sources.

If you don't like the message, attack the messenger. Regardless of who the messanger is, isn't he citing sources that are reputable by most standards? He cites the UN, Nature magazine, the Journal of Glaciology....are you suggesting the studies he cites are bogus?

I think anyone who seriously believes that there is no negative impact by mankind on the Earth and it's environment is in a place beyond denial. I believe that persons such as the one in your link, Scaeagles, are motivated by profit, or they are too stupid to live. I suppose it's all a moot point- we'll probably destroy ourselves in other creative ways long before the Earth ceases to be a habitable place for us, but it still irritates the hell out of me.

Since when do you consider the UN to be a credible source of anything, btw?;)

It isn't that I hold the UN in such high esteem (obviously), it is that I don't understand how anyone who cites a UN report should be considered someone who just recites right wing mantra...is mantra the plural of mantra, or it is mantras? I learned the other day that the singular of confetti is confetto. Not that it matters at all, I just found it odd that there was a singular of confetti. Anyway.....

I don't think anyone claims there is not some negative impact on the earth by mankind, I just don't think that man is responsible for global warming.

Absolutely not. I know that both sides of the global warming argument use hyperbole and shortcuts, so I'm sure that there are nits to pick in Gore's powerpoint presentation. By the same token, I'm also fairly certain that the articles that Taylor cites are not saying exactly what he says they say.

I'm a skeptic. Part of being a good skeptic is to examine the motivation behind any pedagogue. The Heartland Institute? I question their motives.

I'm also not defending Al Gore, by the way, so I'm not disturbed by the conservative "attack the messenger" moves that call him a hypocrite.

You have the right to doubt global warming, scaeagles, but I certainly have the right to question Exxon's Heartland's unbiased opinion too.

This is a good thing. The major thing that scares me is that there seems to be little tolerance of skeptics on the issue of man caused global warming.

It would seem as if he would consider anyone who disagrees with his science as someone who distorts.

Some say it's a religon:eek: