So it isn't about the science....... It's about the money flowing to all the Chicken Littles of the world who benefit by claiming the sky is falling............

Bob:


Wow, you are bitter!


I thought better of you.


" money flowing..... to yourselves."


To whom do you mean, us scientists?


I don't think that the monetary transfer that was agreed in Copenhagen by a handful of nations will flow to us scientists.


Do you, really?


Do you see us scientists as being venal, that we are 'in this' for our own sake?


Or is that just a convenient way to dismiss the science?


In any case, we scientists are not 'in this' for our own sake, quite the contrary. We are 'in this' for everyone's sake, most especially since almost all others than us do not understand what is happening because of us, and some like you and Christopher Monckton, just refuse to see.


I attach 2 papers here that show: (1) the non-greenhouse-gas emitters will be the ones that are most harmed by human-caused climate change; and (2) funding adaptation will help the non-greenhouse-gas emitters to 'weather' (sorry for the meteorological metaphor) the storm of the climate change they did not create.








Why do you harbor so much anger at those of us who are trying to make it better for everyone?


The animosity that you and others show towards me and my colleagues is quite astonishing and exceedingly painful.


Prof. Schlesinger






On Dec 21, 2009, at 12:02 AM, Bob wrote:


So it isn't about the science....... It's about the money flowing to all the Chicken Littles of the world who benefit by claiming the sky is falling............

Copenhagen was a failure because most know there is a lot of junk science misinformation and the world is not in peril. The whole point of this was to change the world economy and expand an industry. The talks broke down because they know it is about money and each wants more of the pie. And nobody cares about the people being hurt by this. There are thousands of children dying today because this movement limits development in third world countries. But you are all getting the money flowing..... to yourselves. Congrats!

You can always respond to the NASA satellite data...... Or is that a truly "inconvenient truth"?


Michael Schlesinger wrote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/21/business/energy-environment/21iht-green21.html?hpw