Looking at that old post again just made me think of something else: I love Glenn Reynold’s ‘Instapundit’ as much as the next fan, but I would humbly recommend his enquirer pass up asking a law professor questions and start the journey of discovery with a trip to three websites:
Pick your side, but choose carefully – someday most people will notice that all these climate models couldn’t predict the present, much less the future
1. http://www.co2science.org. Here visitors will get pointers that direct them to the vast body of research on CO2 and climate that climate alarmists fail to mention, mock or play down. The site really puts CO2 and it’s effects/role in climate in perspective, and is a great jumping off point to ‘hard science’ research papers. Also, be sure to check their “Temperature Record of the Week” ! Every week the site presents a temperature chart of someplace in the U.S. showing average temperatures dropping over the last 70 years.
2 & 3. Visit Climate Audit and Real Climate -- in that order. At the first site you will find devastating arguments against the climate alarmist’s theories and methodologies are the norm. At the second, you will find ad hominem attacks against those who oppose the climate alarmists are the norm. The first website touts empirical evidence, repeatable findings, and multi-disciplinary research. The second…......doesn’t (but they have “models”!).
Climate Audit has noted a peculiar ground rule for the latest IPCC ‘report'. Seems the final draft can only be changed to make the ‘scientific’ report match the executive summary. Now that is ‘science’ the United Nations way!