Difference between revisions of "Settled science"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (Reverted edits by RedNeckBastard (Talk); changed back to last version by BrianCo) |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
Donald Luskin wrote: | Donald Luskin wrote: | ||
| − | :If you question whether [[global warming]] is happening, or whether human activity is causing it, or whether it’s worth doing anything about it, then you must be a crack-pot. You are standing athwart the “consensus of scientists.” You are disputing “'''settled science'''.” You are a “global warming denier,” the moral equivalent of an apologist for the Nazi holocaust. [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDY5OTM1ZThlN2NjYTUzZjVlZmVkMDU3MDZkODM0NDM=] | + | :If you question whether [[global warming]] is happening, or whether [[human]] activity is causing it, or [[whether]] it’s worth doing anything about it, then you must be a crack-pot. You are standing athwart the “consensus of [[scientists]].” You are disputing “'''settled science'''.” You are a “global warming denier,” the moral equivalent of an apologist for the [[Nazi]] holocaust. [http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDY5OTM1ZThlN2NjYTUzZjVlZmVkMDU3MDZkODM0NDM=] |
==External links== | ==External links== | ||
Revision as of 02:06, November 28, 2007
Donald Luskin wrote:
- If you question whether global warming is happening, or whether human activity is causing it, or whether it’s worth doing anything about it, then you must be a crack-pot. You are standing athwart the “consensus of scientists.” You are disputing “settled science.” You are a “global warming denier,” the moral equivalent of an apologist for the Nazi holocaust. [1]