Comments on: Gluckman — great baby doctor but no climate scientist http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/06/gluckman-great-baby-doctor-but-no-climate-scientist/ Taking the heat out of global warming Thu, 09 Sep 2010 18:14:00 +1200 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Andy http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/2010/06/gluckman-great-baby-doctor-but-no-climate-scientist/comment-page-1/#comment-22680 Andy Thu, 10 Jun 2010 08:45:31 +0000 http://www.climateconversation.wordshine.co.nz/?p=5707#comment-22680 <em> We need to explore the origins of such denialism which is at the heart of the so‐called debate over anthropogenic climate change. Such active rejection of the scientific consensus has also been seen in other controversies, including the causal relationship between tobacco smoking and lung cancer, the alleged but non‐existent relationship between measles immunisation and autism, and in the denial of the causative relationship between the HIV virus and AIDS."</em> " Perhaps Prof Gluckman could comment on the issues surrounding positive vs negative feedbacks addressed in this document. This is the crux of the "debate" in my opinion. “Global Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination” http://www.probeinternational.org/UPennCross.pdf He might also like to comment confusing statements re. NZ emissions that I have posted here: http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2010/06/ets-campaign-heats-up-unlike-climate.html?cid=6a00d8341c51bc53ef0133f08b52a9970b#comment-6a00d8341c51bc53ef0133f08b52a9970b And maybe Prof Gluckman would like to explain to the NZ public how we intend to reduce GHG emissions by 50% in 2050. Some examples would help. Thanks
We need to
explore the origins of such denialism which is at the heart of the so‐called debate over
anthropogenic climate change.
Such active rejection of the scientific consensus has also been seen in other controversies,
including the causal relationship between tobacco smoking and lung cancer, the alleged but
non‐existent relationship between measles immunisation and autism, and in the denial of
the causative relationship between the HIV virus and AIDS.”

”
Perhaps Prof Gluckman could comment on the issues surrounding positive vs negative feedbacks addressed in this document. This is the crux of the “debate” in my opinion.

“Global Warming Advocacy Science: a Cross Examination”

http://www.probeinternational.org/UPennCross.pdf

He might also like to comment confusing statements re. NZ emissions that I have posted here:

http://briefingroom.typepad.com/the_briefing_room/2010/06/ets-campaign-heats-up-unlike-climate.html?cid=6a00d8341c51bc53ef0133f08b52a9970b#comment-6a00d8341c51bc53ef0133f08b52a9970b

And maybe Prof Gluckman would like to explain to the NZ public how we intend to reduce GHG emissions by 50% in 2050.

Some examples would help.

Thanks

]]>