Richard asked Ralph B. Alexander:

Cherry picking the data of the world's top climate scientists is your profession. One of the more unethical pursuits is to cloak personal skepticism in scientific language. That his commentary will be refuted by climate reality in now a certainty. Is it the goal to feel happiness, creative, and joyful?

Ralph B. Alexander I'm not sure I should dignify this ad hominem attack with an answer. My suggestion is that before you make such accusations, Richard, you actually read my book - the one just published ("Science Under Attack: The Age of Unreason"). The book contends that actual scientific evidence, as opposed to artificial computer models, doesn’t support the current consensus that humans are largely responsible for global warming. It does this by examining six contrasting examples of the varied forms of the attack on science, ranging from evolution to vaccination to climate change. My personal belief is that global warming is real, but not that it’s entirely man-made or that it’s dangerous.

flag