Some psychologists might be interested in a recent post "Re: Is
Global Warming really a one-sided point of view or a scientific fact?
#2" [Hake (2009)]. The abstract reads:
ABSTRACT: Bob Fuller in his PHYSOC post of 11 March 2009 asked: "Is
Global Warming really a one-sided point of view or a scientific
fact?" I doubt that any scientifically literate person would call
global warming a scientific "fact," but the scientific research
consensus is that anthropogenic global warming: (a) does indeed
exist [IPCC (2007a)] and (b) poses a threat to life on planet Earth
[IPCC (2007b)]. Rick Tarara responded that " 'Global Warming' has
become a semi-religious doctrine with all kinds of 'facts' of which
only some are scientific." Can Tarara pinpoint any "non-scientific
facts" in the IPCC reports? In any case, the generally ignored
gorilla in the living room is GLOBAL OVERPOPULATION as pointed out by
e.g., Al Bartlett (2008), Elmer Eisner (1999, 2009), and Chris Hedges
(2009).
To access the complete 18 kB post, please click on <http://tinyurl.com/aj2fcg>.
Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
24245 Hatteras Street, Woodland Hills, CA 91367
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands.
<[email protected]>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/>
<http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi/>
<http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com/>
REFERENCES
Hake, R.R. 2009. "Re: Is Global Warming really a one-sided point of
view or a scientific fact? #2," AERA-L post of 14 Mar 2009
09:33:00-0700, online on the OPEN! AERA-L achives at
<http://tinyurl.com/aj2fcg>. The abstract is also online at
<http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2009/03/is-global-warming-point-of-view-or.html>
with provision for comments.
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([email protected])
