Climate Change Debate Tuesday

The Oregonian reports that there will be a debate between Washington's state climatologist and Oregon's state climatologist tomorrow night at OMSI.

The Washington guy is on the alarmist side, and George Taylor, from OSU, believes that the human impact on the climate is not significant.

The Oregonian article goes to great lengths to explain that George Taylor is not credible. After setting up the issue, and playing it straight for the first third of the article, the smears begin.

It says that Taylor is "far" from the "great majority of scientists." And that the "distance from the scientific mainstream and the public has widened as evidence of global warming has mounted in the form of rising temperatures, shrinking glaciers and accelerating snowmelt."

Except one problem: Taylor doesn't say that this evidence of warming are not happening, he says that human beings are not the cause.

The Oregonian quotes Mark Abbott, the dean of the College of Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences at Oregon State University saying "The public is just moving past him. The science certainly has."

And they go on to point out that Taylor is an advisor for a group that gets money from Exxon, and then the governor joins the fray, saying : "He's not the state climatologist. I never appointed him. I think I would know. He's not my weatherman."

This is how you'll be treated if you question the official government position that we have to accept draconian limits in our lifestyle in order to forestall this cataclysm. There is no room for dissent - they have politicized science so completely that they actually think science works on concensus.

How about the other guy - Washington's climatologist? Does he have a dog in the fight? Well, he's one of the lead authors on the soon-to-be-released IPCC Climate Change report. Presumably, he was paid to do this work.

The official position of the IPCC has been for years that man is causing global warming. They want this to be true so badly that in 1998 they actually doctored chapter 8 of the report to delete paragraphs that contradicted this position.

So Mota, Washington's climatologist, should have his credibility scrutinized too, right?

Yeahhh, right.