2 thoughts on “Concept of global warming is a misguided, ill-conceived pseudoscience”

  1. Larry Moore has it right on the “Club of Rome.” It is ideology masquerading as “science.”
    The mathematical models that drove their argument are essentially the same as the Malthus theory and supposed mathematical model of the late 18th century. It is the same model that made Paul Ehrlich, an expert on insects, to make ridiculous predictions that never ever came true, but his alarmism sold well even in intellectual circles. Johnny Carson thought he was oh so profound that he had him on multiple times, boosting his fame and fortune to ridiculous heights. It is a reactionary ideology. There is nothing liberal about it at all. It is founded on the long discredited religious idea of Edenism, the idea that humans were so much better off in the long past good old days, the golden age, which never existed and was never golden in any respect. So it is absurdly ironic that so many liberals have taken this anti-humanist agenda to their bosom. Whenever you hear the word, “sustainability” referred to in a seemingly knowing way, you know you are dealing with someone who is taken in by Malthusian “science.” I have a lot more to say but that is enough here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.