CHIEF’s COMMENT:
We totally agree concerning the subject of Al Gore on this. As far as the “detachment” – PUH-leese! Green enviro-activism in science has been one of the largest sources of grant money for meterorological-related science to ever come down the pike…so “calling it as it is” is commonly “calling it as the funding grantors want to see it”, for whatever reasons.

The UN IPCC reports’ conclusions have been drafted sith political/ideological factors dominant over quality of science. The much-ballyhooed computer models used to predict the glowbull warming apocalypse are based in many cases on wildly inaccurate and incomplete assumptions, along with the application of demonstrably inaccurate and invalid statistical data.

A majority of scientists (called “natural philosophers” then) didn’t accept the observations of Copernicus and Galileo when they were first published either. This historical observation should provide a cautionary note on possible dangers from using a “democratic consensus” to form scientific knowledge (and policy for that matter).

There is a LOT of well-researched, documented, and published (incuding with scientific peer-review) research and observation that flies in the face of the current Orthodox Church of Glowbull Warming.

Meanwhile, if you REALLY think human activity causes glowbull warming, then DON’T EXHALE!