well obviously, in the sense of right vs left. (he couldn't possibly have meant right vs wrong, could he? that would be too silly even for him)

apparently, the decision to fire Kristol was made when the higher-ups actually read his column for the first time. (no, not really!)

just what i need, a treatise on the distinction between heat and infrared radiation from somebody who just informed us that

"The earth's atmosphere is approximately 0.3% CO2*. The numbers past the 3 have been getting larger over the last 4-5 decades and the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere has increased by approximately 0.03% since roughly the end of WWII."

which is supposed to adquately portray the indisputible fact that the level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen steadily from 280 parts per million to 387 parts per million since roughly 1750, or from about 310 parts per million to 387 parts per million "since roughly the end of WWII." http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051007/images/keeling430.gif , http://www.wri.org/powerpoints/climate.ppt , http://faculty.ccri.edu/kkortz/docs/LTClimateChange.pdf , http://co2.cms.udel.edu/images/AtmCO2_image001.gif , etc. etc. etc.

Hint: if you're discussing the percentage increase in something, you usually use the initial amount of that thing as the denominator; particularly in this case where you're about to tell us that the rest of the atmosphere is inactive in absorbing infrared so the percentage of the total atmosphere is irrelevant. So that most anyone looking at the numbers would say that the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has increased by (387-310)/310 = 25% since the end of WWII; which has a different feel to it than "increased by approximately .03%" given that, as you point out, the 99.46% of the atmosphere composed of oxygen, nitrogen, and argon has zero absorbance.

*You're off by a factor of ten here, btw.

oh, that's easy:

The earth isn't warming

the warming is caused by the sun because mars is warming

the warming is caused by cosmic rays

the warming is an artifact of bad measurement techniques

the earth is cooling

it's been cold in america and europe this month

carbon dioxide is good for plants

carbon dioxide is not a poison

the earth would be a better planet if it were warmer

it would be too expensive to avoid putting carbon dioxide into the atmosphere

the climate changed in the past and is always changing

the climate is so stable it's absurd to think humans could change it

there isn't enough carbon dioxide in the atmosphere to absorb significant infrared so more won't make a difference

the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is already sufficient to absorb all the infrared so more won't make a difference

it's all a plot by the vastly wealthy and powerful climatology cartel to maintain their lives of wealth and privilege and grant money by demanding more research

we need to do more research before making a decision

it's not proved scientifically

there is no consensus among scientists

scientific consensus is meaningless

more and more scientists are disagreeing with AGW

scientists are afraid to disagree with AGW because they won't get grant money

Al Gore is fat.

I think that about sums up their theory.

Hmm.... Republican "thought" processes:

WTC is bombed 6 weeks after Clinton takes office, Clinton administration attacks perceived al Qaeda targets and is castigated for "wag the dog" attempts to distract from important business of investigating details of his blow job, Clinton administration manages to hit convoy transporting bin Laden with missile but bin Laden survives, no other attacks on US soil during Clinton administration; analysis: "Clinton administration failed to keep America safe"

WTC is destroyed nine months after Bush takes offce, having been warned by outgoing Clinton administration regarding dangers of al Qaeda, having received memo entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.", Bush launches war in two different countries, fails to get anywhere near bin Laden despite bankrupting government and sapping military, announces he doesn't care that much about bin Laden, worldwide rise in antiAmerican sentiment, bin Laden puts out more videos than most pop stars, no other attacks on US soil during Bush administration; analysis: "Bush administration succeeded in keeping America safe"

You ever look into a pot of water after you've put it on the stove? Not only does it get hot, but it starts swirling around, you can see the currents being generated by the fact that heat is not applied to every molecule of the liquid evenly. That's what happens when you put energy into the system. The atmosphere acts the same way. That's why you have storms in the summer when there's more energy in the system and not when it's 20 below.

can't say about the other two, but New England's "record breaking cold" is only breaking records for the 21st century. In fact, we had two daily high temp records in december. in the last year, we had 5 daily record highs and one record monthly high; the year as a whole was the 19th warmest in the past 139 in the region. in contrast, there was only one day which came within 5 degrees of the previous record daily low temp. what we're seeing is what would have been termed a normal or slightly warmer than normal winter in the 1980s, for the first time in more than a decade. the newspaper prints the total number of degree-days of heating for the past year vs the average year (average for what span of years they don't specify); it's still fewer now than average.

as for the 20 below days in the northern prairies, they were pretty routine when i was growing up. i've noticed a bunch of what-me-warming? folks posting a link to a newspaper article regarding 24 straight days of 25 below in saskatoon this year as proof of "global cooling", apparently without noting that the same article not only refers to a string of 21 days of 25 below in January 1950, but mentions that it also hit 45 and 46 below that month, unlike now. selective blindness.