Ahem, increased C02 *DOES* increase global warming. How do I know? The CO2 in our atmosphere keeps the global temperature above freezing.

Is too much C02 a bad thing with regards to global warming? Yes, and if you don't believe me, look at Venus, with its surface temperatures hot enough to melt lead. Venus's temperatures are the end product of a process of a runaway greenhouse effect , and you are telling me that increasing CO2 emissions from human activity will not cause an increase in global temperatures?

Perhaps you misunderstood the guy because he could not have been saying what you said he was saying, and still be called a scientist. The theory is full of holes.



Tell me his name and I will try to find out.

There's a book out that makes for some interesting reading along these same lines. It's "The Republican War on Science" by Chris Mooney. It was on the NY Times best sellers list (yeah, yeah, that pinko commie leftist liberal devil-worshipping newspaper etc. etc.) Mooney questions the Bush Admins. policies concerning sciences, and asks if it ignores or refutes much of mainstream scientists research and findings in order to please its mostly conservative and Christian right support base.

He says that the Repubs and religious lobbyists have
formed a coalition of sorts whose main purpose is to discredit scientists whose work does not agree with their viewpoint on certain issues...like energy policy (like say no to global warming a la Sen. James Inhofe and others) who btw receives support from the big energy companies.

Mooney says Bush-Repub. linked think tanks like The Discovery Institute are opposed to teaching evolution in public schools. And other things like ordering the CDC to remove information about condom use from its website.

Are the Bush neo-con Republicans labeling mainstream scientists as extremists and purveyors of junk science in order to promote their political agenda and stay on good terms with those in the Religious right? What about limiting stem cell research as Bush has done in the past? Very interesting who's calling who a junk scientist these days, it's almost as if all scientists are...are EVIL and naturally should be exposed as the sons of Satan that they might be.

Wake, I am inclined to agree with you to an extent. I think the Bush Administration and its policies that have flowed into the rest of the Executive Branch are hindering scientific research in the US. I think this is contrary to our long term interests globally. Personally, I would even be willing to see money shifted away from overtly military programs and used to fund pure research. I think, in the long term, we would benefit in both the military and civilian sectors from such research. I would even go so far as to say that such research should be subjected to limited government oversight and interference beyond that which is absolutely necessary to ensure the funds are not wasted and that the research is conducted in a safe and responsible fashion.

Here's what worries me a tad about this. The stem cell research people...experts...are being funded in other countries. The Koreans, Japanese, etc. What happens if they make some major breakthrough that leaves companies here out of the running? We don't know for certain exactly how far along the Koreans and others are at this point. When it comes, this could be worth billions, maybe even trillions in potential medical applications. I've read that some researchers here have already hired themselves out to foreign owned corporations.

Correlation in science does not necessarily equal cause.