Global Warmers Admit No Solutions No treaty will prevent global warming, says a key scientist who believes manmade climate change is happening. That's bad news for the United Nations' bureaucrats who are meeting in New Dehli to conclude a treaty to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. ... On the other hand, Wigley et al.'s gloomy assessment of regulatory and technology-based solutions might just encourage policy makers to pay more attention to the junk science underlying the fantasy of manmade global warming.

The author misreads a study as saying that regulation isn't going to be enough to stop global warming. Then he uses that to demonstrate that the idea of global warming is based on junk science. Global warming is to big to stop, therefore it doesn't exist? Apparently any study that contradicts the mainstream view of global warming is proof of the opposite position, regardless of the actual content of the study. You'd think someone who prides himself on debunking junk science would be careful about unfounded leaps of logic like that. This may be more evidence for my theory that the amount a person claims to be objectively looking at facts and cutting through spin is directly proportional to the degree to which they're trying to prove an ideological point (this story appeared on Fox "we report, you decide" News -- coincidence?).