An Inconvenient Price

Thanks. Once again you have proved a voice of reason. And, you gave me the topic of my blog article today. It is titled "What Would We do Without George Will?" and while I am the rankest amateur, I did enjoy writing it. http://inkslingerchronicles.blogspot.com/

Thanks. You gave me the topic of my blog article today. It is titled "What Would We do Without George Will?" and while I am the rankest amateur, I did enjoy writing it. http://inkslingerchronicles.blogspot.com/

UGH! Okay, Mr. Will. Even a cursory attempt to research your piece beyond reading a single book would tell you that assuming "Global Warming" means everything gets warmer is akin to those who assume evolution is false because it's a scientific "theory." As Inigo Montoya might say, "I don't think that word means what you think it means."

Global Warming is really about Global Climate Change, and the result is extreme temperature changes -- not just warming. And extreme may seem only like a few degrees, but that's enough to destroy ecosystems, alter currents, jet streams and weather patterns and do economic damage far greater than the cost of curbing the trends now, before it's too late. The UN report was the summation of hundreds of studies, dozens of experts and Will would counter it all with ONE book by ONE supposed expert. There will always be contradictory opinions. Especially when billions in profits from maintaining the status quo are at stake.

I've long since stopped assuming Will could avoid the Clinton-Gore derangement syndrome. But this is one of his worst non-baseball embarrassments I've read in ages.

An even more unconvenient truth: MEAT EATING is the leading cause of global warmimg. Grab your veggies, folks!

Shame on the editors at Newsweek for printing George Will???s uncritical regurgitation of Bjorn Lomborg???s most recent book. At a time when our country desperately needs a critical and balanced national discussion on the subject of global climate change, Will???s rhetoric literally embodies the very thing he condemns: a one-dimensional and heavily biased perspective on a topic that is not only vastly complex but that literally eludes a world of experts as to what our future truly holds. Using a sole source, Lomborg???s book, as bible, Will is so lost as to not even recognize his transparently hypocritical position: using an extremist view to criticize and ridicule other extremist views. Will and Newsweek should be ashamed. What???s next, Will suggesting that I and thousands of other scientists need ???perfecting??? because we don???t accept his simplistically rosy vision of a warmer world? It???s clear that Will is not even familiar with the science of global warming or with the findings that our best science has produced. For instance, Will cites the U.N.???s 2007 report on the effects of global warming and gullibly states ???the warming that is reasonably projected might be problematic, but it won???t be devastating.??? It???s obvious that Will hasn???t actually read the U.N. report, or even a summary, which declares, among a multitude of likely effects, one billion people impacted by the depletion of freshwater resources in Asia alone, and up to 250 million people faced with malnutrition and starvation in Africa alone due to the probable effects of global warming. Yet, according to the omniscient Will, ???a net negative effect will be less injurious than current agricultural policies.??? When the country, and the world, yearns for serious discussion, Newsweek gives us George F. Will. Thanks for nothing.

Glad to see there is at least one sane person writing for Newsweek.

I don't normally read George Will and now I know why. This is the most unconvincing, biased and laughable thing I have read in recent memory. We should look forward to the benefits of global warming? We should ignore global warming because there are other serious issues such as federal agriculture policy and traffic accidents? It's sad to think someone might take this charlatanism seriously.

Global warming is not simply about warmer temperatures as you would lead readers to believe in your heat vs cold death tolls. Its the effect of the warmer temperature at the poles of our planet. Its about the increasing extremes in weather. When the ice caps melt and change ocean currents it will alter fundamental weather patterns causing a global ice age, not simply a planet thats more tropical with fewer polar bears. That is why it is now being referred to as climate change by those who know what they are talking about.