So, what you're saying is that Professor Lindzen is lying in his article? Throwing his reputation to the winds? Or maybe you're saying that I'm lying when I tell you I read the bloody report and came to the same conclusion he did? I have posted links to the report all over the place. Have you read it? Any of it?

A hallmark of a liberal is that what is said is always considered irrelevant compared to WHO IS SAYING IT. The liberal feels deep down inside that facts are malleable, that reality is largely a matter of opinion, and that truth is whatever meshes most neatly with your preconceived opinions. This has the effect of putting every argument into the "sez you-sez me" category, which is nice because the loudest and most persuasive person can win, instead of the one who actually has facts on his side. No actual brains required. Common sense need not apply. Most people in Washington fall into this category.

For example, I could locate a frightening number of people in this country that would firmly agree with the proposition that the only reason Detroit does not make cars that get 500 miles per gallon, is simply because they don't want to. If you raise concepts like physics or economics, these people will look at you like your dog does when you try to explain nuclear physics to him. It is painfully obvious that most people in this country feel that scientific facts and the economic laws of supply and demand are simply something that one chooses to believe or not, like picking a favorite color.

If you don't want to believe people because of where they were published, fine. Did it ever occur to you that other papers with opposing agendas might not publish this at all? You won't see this information in the New York Times. If they had printed it, would you have believed it then?