Tom DeWeese (the guy who wrote the article you present without citation above) has no scientific credentials at all. He's a conservative advocate for free enterprise. And the article that comes from (that is actually the whole article, isn't it?) is a standard bullet point list with no citations and free of any context or counter-arguments. Nir Shaviv, for example, is embroiled in a debate now with two other scientists about the accuracy of his findings - but we don't get to hear about that here. We just see his name mentioned as a "top scientist" (whatever that means).

I hate that this has been politicized so effectively. And honestly I'm not too interested in having this argument, again, with another knee-jerk conservative. It's discouraging to know that you'll read and suck up articles by Tom Fucking DeWeese but won't go read published and peer-reviewed papers by ACTUAL SCIENTISTS.

As far as that documentary, I file it right next to "Loose Change" on the shelf of "documentaries" I only needed to watch once to see how narrow and pre-determined their viewpoint was, and how selectively they picked over the data they wanted to present. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Gre...arming_Swindle Of particular interest there is the part about "top MIT climatologist" Carl Wunsch, and his take on the film. My favorite part: "I'm somewhat troubled that TV companies around the world are treating it as though this were a science documentary. It's not. It's a tendentious political propaganda piece of the sort I really could imagine the Bush Administration in this country could have put out on its own to throw raw meat to their believers. It's not a science film at all. It's a political statement."