Forum for discussing local and world politics and issues. All views are welcomed. Let your opinions be heard on current news and politics.
All standard guidelines apply to this board, No Flaming, No Taunting, No Foul Language,No sexual innuendos,etc..
As politics can be a volatile subject, please consider how you would feel if your comment were directed toward yourself.
Any post deemed to be in violation of guidelines will be deleted or edited without warning or notification. Any continued misbehavior will result in a ban or hidden status, so please play nice!!!
*"Moderators are here for a reason. If a moderator (or Global Moderator or Fencer) requests that a discussion on a certain subject to cease - for whatever reason - please respect these wishes. Failure to do so may result in being hidden, or banned."
*Well, for one, Professor Muller was not a total skeptic. He was 2/3's a believer in anthropogenic global warming long ago.
*Now he's gone all the way.
*His "turnaround" amounts to 33% as he was mostly there for years.
*He's written a book and likely he wants them to sell lots of them. The Left never allows the Right to get away with such a conflict of interest.
*Businesses whose livelihood is based on the need for anthropogenic global warming to be true pay Muller for his "expertise." So it's in his interest to hold to his latest view.
*This is a classic conflict of interest. Not to mention that Muller did NOT do a complete turn around as he was nearly 75% there from the start!
*---> Here’s is Prof. Richard Muller, a Berkeley physicist, toward the conclusion of his 2003 paper on global warming data:
“Let me be clear. My own reading of the literature and study of paleoclimate suggests strongly that carbon dioxide from burning of fossil fuels will prove to be the greatest pollutant of human history. It is likely to have severe and detrimental effects on global climate.”"