Friedman’s ET BS

Government must set “the right standard, set the right regulation,” [Tom Friedman] advises. “Shape the market so it will be innovative. Everyone will kind of whine and moan for a month and then the whole ecosystem will take off.”

Funny. I don’t recall the government plan of “standards” and “regulations” that “shaped the market” that allowed IT revolutionaries like Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, and Marc Andreessen to “take off.” Perhaps Planet Gore contributor Jim Manzi can tell us what government regulations enabled the development of the original killer app, Lotus 1-2-3.

Because I don’t recall any government involvement at all.

Jennifer Marohasy » Ten of the Best Climate Research Papers (Nine Peer-Reviewed): A Note from Cohenite

The accusation of a lack of peer review (PR) by those who mount arguments against anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is at the heart of the elitism, consensus and ad hominem approach used by many supporters of AGW.

It is a red herring. Science should be like the Law; transparent and universally accessible.

Michael Coffman -- Consensus? What Consensus?

Ironically, using the Freedom of Information Act, it has been proven that the so-called 2500 scientists the IPCC claims make up their “consensus,” are really not scientists at all. Of that total, only 308 scientists reviewed the 2007 IPCC report. Many of them disagreed, some strongly so. Not surprisingly, all of their comments were rejected and not included in the report. The remaining 2192 so-called scientists came from all walks of life; politicians, government bureaucrats, social workers, and apparently even a hotel manager. Less than 40 of the 308 scientists were generally supportive of the hypothesis, and less than 5 actually endorsed the report. Yet, the report was hailed by the media as the consensus of thousands of scientists.

Putting this into perspective, for every 1 scientist who even slightly favored the IPCC conclusions, 792 signed the petition saying there was no convincing evidence that there is man-made catastrophic global warming. For every Ph.D. that endorsed the IPCC report, 1800 signed the petition. If anything, there is a scientific consensus that man is not responsible for global warming. What did the media do with this potentially explosive story? They ignored it, as usual. A few, like Fox News, were gracious enough to have a byline on their website. Only the conservative media highlighted this phenomenal story.