At least it doesn’t say we will implode, explode, or otherwise fall to some major catastrophe at a certain date or time like some of the zealots who are screaming about with the year 2012.

But when the yellow jackets start taking over I am going to start riding a bicycle.

I have found myself becoming more and more interested in this global warming thing. Doubtless it is happening but still cannot bring myself to really give a damn.

My BDS does seem to flare up at the most inopportune times. I work on it but it seems to have some of the characteristics of Tourette’s syndrome.

RW - I doubt Al Gore would have made such a dumb prediction. RFK, Jr., maybe. Maybe some of the side-line cheerleaders that have no appreciable audience to begin with.

There was not a single climate scientist who said that climate models that predict a heavy hurricane season this year from global warming.

Well, you’re throwing in a caveat: “climate scientist”. Methinks that Mr. Boortz - and I’m guessing, but this is an educated guess - was going using “the usual suspects on the left that practice punditry” as his basis. I didn’t look it up & so the places I list could be innocent so I’m going to make a general list but if the guy read the huffington post or some other various sites that are not scientific but include a bunch of other people who profess to carry the global warming banner (I’m thinking of Laurie David, RFK, Jr - who blamed Katrina on Bush, btw) as his guide. Easy fodder, sorta like someone on the left pointing to something Freepers discuss as a basis for “the right”. Again, I’m not speaking for Neal but *I* saw & heard several predictions of a bad hurricane season……but, no, I don’t recall the source as it was several weeks ago and my long-term memory cells are full of important things like baseball statistics and 80s song lyrics.

Maybe I had just assumed that global warming was supposed to lead to an increase in the amount of hurricanes as well as an increase in their power.

I’m sure if the oceans rose in temperature an extreme amount, that would be the case. The slight amount of warming that we’ve seen - and we’ve dropped since the high in ‘98, IIRC, when global warming was at its worst - would have a negligent effect on hurricanes. Anyone who says that hurricanes are worse because of global warming is playing politics w/fear and making up @#$%.
Kinda like assuming that the administration insinuated that Iraq had something to do with 9/11
“Insinuated” is completely dependent upon the listener/reader. Thus, that is something inferred, not implied. I can say that it’s dark outside and one person can infer that I’m referring to cloud cover while a race-conscious demagogue could infer that I’d be a racist describing a majority black audience of people gathering (a crude example, but I’m trying to make a point).

The topic is global warming, Buck, try to keep the BDS Iraq-response in check, buddy.

Kinda like assuming that the administration insinuated that Iraq had something to do with 9/11

I guess I pulled both of my assumptions from out of the ether somewhere.

It sure is funny how you can draw a conclusion that was never meant to be drawn.

The “Global Warming nuts” that Boortz refers to suspect that one of the consequences will be more hurricanes, generally speaking (not in any particular season), but there is no concensus on the matter. Their models are less ambiguous about the relative strength of hurricanes, though that is not beyond debate at this point, either. I will be extremely surprised if he finds a single “Global Warming Nut” who made any 2006-season predictions from their theory, at all.

From my vantage point, they set themselves off when they claim that anyone who doesn’t adopt their principles and adhere to their pontifications to be ”ignorant” or ”not a credible person” to discuss the topic. It’s all part of the game, of course, but the attempt to innoculate from criticism does not go unnoticed.

I would agree with you if it weren’t for the fact that people who, like Neal Boortz, publicly dispute the scientific consensus fall completely within three classes:
1) Non-scientist Republican politicians
2) Non-scientist Republican media personalities (yes, I count Neal among the ‘R’s. What’s the emoticon for that? Oh yeah - )
3) A vanishingly small minority of climate-scientist, every one of whom is primarily funded by the energy industry.

That being the case, it seems to me that the indictments of global warming skeptics as “not credible” have themselves too much credibility to be written off as an attempt to “innoculate from criticism”.

I tried to fix that HTML, but a WordPress WSIWYG bug throws those back-slashes in to an edited comment whether you want them or not.