Why are we concealing data about Global warming

Platapus · 07-08-08, 04:56 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/....ap/index.html

Cheney wanted testimony cut, ex-EPA official says
Vice President Dick Cheney's office pushed for major deletions in congressional testimony on the public health consequences of climate change, fearing the presentation by a leading health official might make it harder to avoid regulating greenhouse gases, a former EPA official maintains.

I hold both sides equally guilty in this.

The debate on the many related issues about Global Warming need to continue. There is dissent and I don't think all the information has been reviewed and examined. The issues (multiple) are too complex for a one sentence answer.

We simply can't appropriately address this problem if

1. The "pro" Global Warming people are selective about what data and which models are being used

2. The "con" Global Warming people are selective about what data and which models are being used

We need to explore ALL hypothesis, identify ALL applicable data, evaluate ALL the models for accuracy, review ALL the different analyses on this topic, analyze all the analytical methodologies used, academically review ALL reports independently so we can find out:

What are the hypotheses?
What are the possible states of each hypothesis?
What are the probable states of each hypothesis?
What indicators support which hypothesis?
What indicators refute which hypothesis?
What are our options?
What are our reasonable options?
What are the means of implementing these options?

So the various governments can make a logical, complete, and accurate assessment and decision.

Let's do this and do it completely and do it logically.

07-08-08, 04:56 PM	#1
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,361 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	Why are we concealing data about Global warming http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/07/....ap/index.html Cheney wanted testimony cut, ex-EPA official says Vice President Dick Cheney's office pushed for major deletions in congressional testimony on the public health consequences of climate change, fearing the presentation by a leading health official might make it harder to avoid regulating greenhouse gases, a former EPA official maintains. I hold both sides equally guilty in this. The debate on the many related issues about Global Warming need to continue. There is dissent and I don't think all the information has been reviewed and examined. The issues (multiple) are too complex for a one sentence answer. We simply can't appropriately address this problem if 1. The "pro" Global Warming people are selective about what data and which models are being used 2. The "con" Global Warming people are selective about what data and which models are being used We need to explore ALL hypothesis, identify ALL applicable data, evaluate ALL the models for accuracy, review ALL the different analyses on this topic, analyze all the analytical methodologies used, academically review ALL reports independently so we can find out: What are the hypotheses? What are the possible states of each hypothesis? What are the probable states of each hypothesis? What indicators support which hypothesis? What indicators refute which hypothesis? What are our options? What are our reasonable options? What are the means of implementing these options? So the various governments can make a logical, complete, and accurate assessment and decision. Let's do this and do it completely and do it logically. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.