Global Warming and Renewable Energy

The failure to insist on objective science is part of the problem with you folks who make your living in the “alternative” energy field. I do not make any money on either existing energy or alternative energy. Can you truthfully make the same statement?
The answer is no, I can’t. And I agree that those who stand to profit from the world’s acceptance or rejection of global climate change (obviously) have an incentive to shade the data in their direction. But, as I point on in my recent book on renewable energy: “What would you guess represents more money (and thus more incentive to bias one’s findings): the business of atmospheric research, or the business of selling of trillions of gallons of gasoline?”
I also point out that the vast majority of climate scientists who have studied global warming and published peer-reviewed papers on the subject support the theory.

I always feel sorry for the people who live in swing states in presidential elections, as they are bombarded with messages around the clock for periods of several months leading up to November. Of course, we all take the brunt of the chicanery and lies that goes into each one of the ads for state and local representatives and ballot iniatives, and, just like Christmas shopping season, it seems to start earlier ever year.
I was speaking with my mother yesterday, a decided political conservative. During our talk, she noted gently, “Your blog is left of center, but not so far as to be revolting.” I got a terrific laugh out of that. How nice it is not to be considered revolting by one’s parents!
I don’t claim to be an expert at unravelling the lingo surrounding the many NGOs that are a part of the renewable energy movement. I do, however, want to do my part in promoting the good works of as many of these fine folks as possible. To that end, I urge readers to check out
A recent guest post called attention to IBM’s announcements and recent initiatives in 
