Scientific skepticism is a healthy thing. Scientists should always challenge themselves to expand their knowledge, improve their understanding and refine their theories. Yet this isn't what happens in global warming skepticism. Skeptics vigorously criticise any evidence that supports anthropogenic global warming and yet eagerly, even blindly embrace any argument, op-ed piece, blog or study that refutes global warming.

So this website gets skeptical about global warming skepticism. Do their arguments have any scientific basis? What does the peer reviewed scientific literature say?

Skeptical Science is created by John Cook, an ex-physicist (majoring in solar physics at the University of Queensland).

=

As the website intro says, there is a lot of politics mixed in with environmental scientific issues. The politics comes in from both sides of the divide. Just look at the kinds of laws being put in place in the name of global warming to see who is winning the argument. The one good thing about this site is that the webmaster allows contrary opinions and links to be freely aired - for that he should be applauded.

To comment on this article Register for Free.
Make Money adding your own bookmarks and articles.
Earn extra money bookmarking your articles here...

On Writing Online