Comment on Open-mindedness is the wrong(?) approach by Norm Kalmanovitch

In science openmindedness is of value as long as it is not contradicted by fact. The fact that global warming ended by 1998 and the fact that the world has been in fact cooling since 2002 trumps any consensus of open minded people claiming human caused global. This includes Naiomi Oreskes who in 2004, six years after global warming ended and two years after the world had already started cooling, wrote a paper in the journal “Science” debunking claims that scientists disagreed about global warming in the past decade.
Openmindedness is about rejecting ludicrous claims that CO2 emissions from fossil fuels are causing the CO2 concentration to rise at unprecidented rates when data shows that no such accelerated rate of increase is taking place.
Openmindedness is about rejecting the notion of an enhanced greenhouse effect from increased CO2 when three decades of satellite measurements show no detectable enhancement of the greenhouse effect.
Openmindedness is about rejecting the notion that increased CO2 has the effect stated in the CO2 forcing parameter of the climate models when observation shows that the 14.77micron band of the Earth’s thermal radiation is too close to saturation from the existing concentration of CO2 to allow this to be possible.
Most importantly openmindedness is the ability to judge that starving millions of the world’s poor by using food as feedstock for biofuels is a morally unconscionable remedy for addressing a non existant alarmist fabrication.