Settled Science?

As many of you know, I am a global warming skeptic. This skepticism has probably generated more negative responses than I have received on all other issues combined. It is as though I attacked someone's religion. But of course I did. I became skeptical when global warming was proclaimed as "settled science" by its adherents. As I have pointed out before, there is no such thing as "settled science". Those who proclaim it are doing so in order to stifle inquiry and criticism. One would think after the revelations in the hacked emails at East Anglia, the resignation of the center's director, the admission that he "lost" the confirming data (one does not "lose" data!), the admission by him that the earth has actually been cooling, the finding that the UN report that is the basis for governments pushing global warming is full of fabrications and speculations not supported by evidence, that journal editors have been rejecting articles that find other conclusions and on and on and on, that the adherents would now be saying that we should reassess the evidence. But no. They are digging in their heels. If you are interested in reading the details of all this and more about the global warming hype go to climatedepot.com. My esteemed university that has awarded an honorary degree to Dolly Parton is now awarding one to Al Gore. “Vice President Gore’s career has been marked by visionary leadership, and his work has quite literally changed our planet for the better,” said UT Knoxville Chancellor Jimmy G. Cheek. Well what do you expected from a grown man named "Jimmy"?