Amanda at Think Progress goes on a rant against Huckabee and Thompson regarding their positions about Global Warming.  IN her post she notes:

Huckabee responds that “scientifically,” he doesn’t know whether global warming is “overblown.” Thompson goes a step further, claiming that the “state of entitlements” and “extremists” who “want to do drastic things to our economy” are the real problems:

THOMPSON: There are a lot of unanswered questions. We don’t know to the extent this is a cyclical thing. This may or may not effect very much. The extremists are the ones who want to do drastic things to our economy before we have more answers as to how much good we can do and whether people in the other parts of the world are going to contribute. It’s the fact that our entitlements are bankrupting the next generation. We’re spending the money of those yet to be born and we can’t continue that way.

Thompson and Huckabee are wrong. The debate is over about whether manmade global warming is a threat. Even members of the Bush White House have admitted so.

Well the first thing to note is that Amanda is dead wrong.  The science is not settled, and any honest debate needs to remember that.

It’s ironic that this article just came to my attention.

Sun, Not Man, Main Cause of Climate Change, New Study Says

According to a new study on global warming, climate scientists at the University of Rochester, the University of Alabama, and the University of Virginia found that the climate change models based on human influence do not match observed warming.

That is contrary to the views held by former Vice President Al Gore, who accepted the Nobel Prize on Monday along with the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and who thinks that climate change is largely caused by human action.

 Gore wants nations to tax carbon dioxide emissions and not build any new coal plants, among other steps. “It is time to make peace with the planet,” Gore said in his Nobel speech, as reported by the Associated Press. “We must quickly mobilize our civilization with the urgency and resolve that has previously been seen only when nations mobilized for war.”

The new report, which challenges the claims of Gore and the IPCC, was published in the December 2007 issue of the International Journal of Climatology of the Royal Meteorological Society.

The report was written by David Douglass at the University of Rochester, John Christy at the University of Alabama, and Benjamin Pearson and S. Fred Singer at the University of Virginia.

“Our findings basically are that fingerprints - that is to say the pattern of warming - that’s predicted by greenhouse models does not match the fingerprints of observations, so there is a disconnect between greenhouse models and the actual reality of observations,” Singer told Cybercast News Service.

So how settled is that?

What is settled is that Gore has convinced people like her who would rather blame someone as opposed to accepting the sometimes the planet has a mind of its own.

Yes, even the Whitehouse is starting to parrot the Gore lies, and jump on the bandwagon.  But no matter how many times they say it, the fact will remain that Climate Change has not been conclusively shown to be man made, and the models used to prove so are being increasingly shown to be flawed, and in some case deliberately skewed.

Junk Science at its finest.

Thompson is right, those who embrace will bankrupt us to do nothing.

For what its worth, Thompson is taking a “let’s find out” attitude when you look at his comments in full:

It’s a more obvious problem. I mean, ultimately global warming may be a greater problem. I don’t think we know the answer to that. I can’t give you a list of specific items I would address. I think research and development has got to be at the top of that list.

As opposed to Edward’s answer which toe’s the safe line:

It seems to me that every time we get more scientific information it indicates the problem is more severe, more serious than we though. So, no, I don’t think it’s being over-hyped.

His solution?

Have a national cap on carbon emissions. I’d make polluters pay, people who below the cap are still putting out carbon dioxide. And that money from making the polluters pay for a permit to do that should be invested in clean, renewable sources of energy, wind, solar, fuels. We have to clean up our act. As we start cleaning up our act, I think we’re in a place to be able to go to China, to India, to the other countries that need to be part of the solution and say “we’re developing the technology. We’re willing to make this technology available to you. But we’re gonna have to solve this problem together.”

Particularly when what they want to do is more harmful then good.

Simply pointing fingers and repeating lies will never take the place of science and truth.

More at: http://www.memeorandum.com/071211/p135#a071211p135

  Trackposted to Outside the Beltway, The Virtuous Republic, Blog @ MoreWhat.com, Mark My Words, Rosemary’s Thoughts, The Random Yak, Right Truth, Adam’s Blog, Shadowscope, The Bullwinkle Blog, Big Dog’s Weblog, The Amboy Times, Chuck Adkins, Conservative Cat, third world county, Faultline USA, Allie is Wired, DragonLady’s World, The World According to Carl, Blue Star Chronicles, Pirate’s Cove, Celebrity Smack, The Pink Flamingo, Republican National Convention Blog, CORSARI D’ITALIA, High Desert Wanderer, Stageleft, Right Voices, and The Yankee Sailor, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.