I said before, Leeuwenhoek2, that I'm not interested in correcting your misunderstanding of what I write. That's even more true after these last two posts from you since, as the saying goes, you're "not even wrong." Trying to disentangle the half-truths from the misstatements and misinterpretations is probably beyond my ability and certainly wouldn't repay the effort it would take.
So I will just say ...
Nonsense. ThinkProgress bases everything in good science and accurate reporting, and routinely provides links back to verifiable sources.
Sure, it's leftish. But it doesn't lie.
Seems to me this is the politics of climate 101 sort of stuff. Which illustrates why ethical Buddhist sangas should seek to have a multi-perspective, multi-viewpoint, multi-partisan or trans-partisan understanding of the issues.
I'm not sure what you mean here. That your
posts are "politics of climate 101 sort of stuff" ? That mine
And I can't see any "Buddhist sangas" around here, ethical or not, so who might "seek to have a multi-perspective, multi-viewpoint, multi-partisan or trans-partisan understanding of the issues" ?
And is a "multi-perspective, multi-viewpoint, multi-partisan or trans-partisan understanding" even useful, or does it just seek to hide the truth under a steaming pile of doubt?
I've just given you rather a lot of questions but I will finish with something nice and simple: a description of what I'm trying to do in this thread, and why.
Compassion demands that we, as Buddhists or just as decent human beings, seek to alleviate suffering.
I believe that climate change, unchecked, will lead directly to untold misery for millions of people. Climate scientists have been saying as much, with increasing urgency, for more than thirty years; and I trust their work as published in peer-reviewed publications up to and including the IPCC reports and disseminated by responsible journalists.
Sharing my knowledge about climate change, and thereby encouraging people to act against it, is my chosen way of working for the wellbeing of others, now and in the future. As a non-scientist with a good science background, and as a teacher (i.e. a professional communicator), my natural role is to act as an interpreter and populariser, and I know that most people don't want or need anything too technical.
So I usually post excerpts from credible secondary sources, with links to the secondary sources, which in turn usually link to the primary sources. That allows the casual reader to grab the essential points and move on, while anyone with doubts or questions can quickly and easily track down as much depth as they want.