10 Questions For Al Gore And The Global Warming Crowd

Townhall.com John Hawkins March 30, 2007

I’ll be the first to admit that like most conservatives, I’m deeply skeptical of the idea that mankind is causing global warming. Is that because I take payoffs from the energy industry, don’t like Al Gore, don’t like science, or any of the other silly excuses global warming alarmists come up with to explain why people don’t buy their theory?


Former Vice President Al Gore testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, March 21, 2007, before the Senate Environment Committee hearing on global climate change. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh)

It’s because “the Earth-is-going-to-burn-us-alive” crowd cannot answer the most basic questions about the theory that they haughtily insist is so beyond reproach that there should be no more need for debate. In fact, the most ironic thing about the global warming argument is that Al Gore and Company have declared that it’s settled, but they have to use scary stories about cities being flooded a hundred years from now and fake tales about polar bears drowning to sell it. If they’re on such rock solid scientific ground, why doesn’t the science speak for itself? Does anyone remember Sir Isaac Newton or Albert Einstein trying to get people to buy into their scientific theories by coming up with doomsday scenarios? No, of course not.

Despite that, like most conservatives, I’m open minded and could be convinced that mankind is responsible for causing global warming — but with science, not scaremongering. If the proponents of the manmade global warming theory can come up with good answers to questions like these, you can expect everyone, including me, to accept their theory:

. . . more


4 thoughts on “10 Questions For Al Gore And The Global Warming Crowd”

  1. The earth has warmed and cooled numerous times in the past and many of those temperature swings have been much greater than anything we’ve experienced so far.

    This can’t be correct. If it were, then there would not be much basis for whipping the ecological voters into a frenzy to vote D. Wait. Maybe those wooly mammoths were burning petroleum and using CFC-based hair spray. We just haven’t discovered it yet. Yeah, that’s it.

  2. Articles like this are just irresponsible

    Yes, thinking and questioning is almost always “irresponsible”…;)

  3. I have a question, why do diplomats need to be finalizing a global warming report?

    As for near certainty… remember phrenology?

  4. Note 4. Yes, I noticed that too. In fact, the article mentioned only 56 scientists taking part as I recall.

Comments are closed.