"Lloyd" wrote
Because we let economists decide scientific issues. Does that mean I
get to decide if the Fed should raise interest rates?

Shouldn't the Proctologists be deciding that one?

On Mar 11, 2:32 am, "00BNZ" wrote:
March 11, 2008

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/a.../heraldsun/com...

American reporters covering the presidential primaries treat the global
warming scaremongers with the indifference they deserve:

3200 questions have been asked by TV reporters, eight have been about
global warming, climate change...

But Lateline host Tony Jones is dismayed:

TONY JONES: Why the disconnect between public interest and public
policy?. Have US campaign strategists looked at what happened in the
Australian election, particularly in that last year or so before the
election and how the issue swang around and became important? Have they
thought about that as a way of using it politically themselves?
--

Warmest Regards

Bonzo

The Fourth Report of the IPCC might just as well decree the
suppression of all climatology textbooks, and replace them in our
schools with press communiqués. ... Day after day, the same mantra -
that 'the Earth is warming up' - is churned out in all its forms. As
'the
ice melts' and 'sea level rises' the Apocalypse looms ever nearer!
Without realizing it, or perhaps without wishing to, the average
citizen in bamboozled, lobotomized, and lulled into mindless acceptance.
... Non-believers in the greenhouse scenario are in the
position of those long ago who doubted the existence of God ...
Marcel Leroux

It should be abundantly clear by now that the AGW hypothesis is
contradicted by the facts/measurements/observations and should
therefore be abandoned and be substituted by a hypothesis which
better matches the facts.
- Hans Labohm

Because we let economists decide scientific issues. Does that mean I
get to decide if the Fed should raise interest rates?