Quick follow up…

Just read something and thought of the post from yesterday. Specifically my attempt to encourage critical thought and examination. Here is what I read:

Today's scientists know that if strong action to counteract climate change is not successfully achieved, within one generation the world will be a place characterized by intense heat waves, widespread disease, drought, food shortages, and deadly super storms.

Focus on the bolded part. (The statement that scientists know this is irrelevant to my point, but I didn't feel like cutting out part of the sentence.) A critical examination of that sentence will tell you it is a worthless statement because, humanity, Nature and the Earth have already suffered through and survived each of these, long before the temperature anomaly was significantly positive.
A meaningless statement meant purely to evoke an emotional response in people foolish enough to only read words and not consider them.
Another quote from the same item:

The process of peer review invokes critical thinking by competitive, judgmental scientists to gauge the appropriateness of research results to be published for widespread reading.

Again, consider the bolded text. This is an accurate, to my knowledge, description of peer review, but note that it says "appropriateness of research results." Peer review doesn't certify that a study is correct, but that it was done correctly and that the conclusions are supported by the data. If the process did certify a study was correct then we could not have peer reviewed studies being published that have falsified data, but, while rare, it does happen.
(I am not implying that the data for what the item refers to was falsified, in case you're curious or tempted to flame a straw-man.)
A grain of salt a day, keeps ignorance away.

Feel I should add this from the same article:

"Earth's climate has always changed. Modern climate change does not, however, fit geologic history. In the past half century, the rate and extent of climate change has been extraordinary. Despite extensive searching, no known natural processes can account for the present climate trend of extremely rapid warming of the temperature of the lower atmosphere. Furthermore, industrial exhaust, deforestation, and large- scale agribusiness are known producers of heat-trapping gas in the atmosphere. It is only logical to hypothesize that there is a strong likelihood that these human activities are causing the extraordinary warming. Vigorous testing of this hypothesis demonstrates that modern climate change is a consequence of human-caused global warming; in fact, among scientists, this has been known for decades."

While I can make certain arguments about this statement, I recognize that they would be bias, so I will not make them. The comment I will make is that it is a good quote. It is not meant to deceive or misinform. Perhaps sway bias, but then what statement does not have that purpose?