Map Makers Show Greenland Sections As Ice Free To Please AGW Advocates

The publishers of the world’s most prestigious atlas have been caught out by Cambridge scientists exaggerating the effects of climate change.

In its latest edition, the £150 Times Atlas of the World has changed a huge coastal area of Greenland from white to green, suggesting an alarming acceleration of the melting of the northern ice cap.

Accompanying publicity material declared the change reflected ‘concrete evidence’ that 15 per cent of the ice sheet around the island – an area the size of the United Kingdom – had melted since 1999.

But last night the atlas’s publishers admitted that the ‘ice-free’ areas could in fact still be covered by sheets of more than a quarter of a mile thick. It came after a group of leading polar scientists from Cambridge University wrote to them saying their changes were ‘incorrect and misleading’ and that the true rate of melting has been far slower.

Experts from the University’s internationally-renowned Scott Polar Research Institute said the apparent disappearance of 115,830 sq miles of ice had no basis in science and was contradicted by recent satellite images


JammieWearingFool: Atlasgate: 'A Killer Mistake That Cannot Be Winked Away'

LOLOLOLOL......you retards are priceless....

So what did happen? The Times Atlas of the World, which BTW is not a peer reviewed science journal, seems to have mistakenly exaggerated ice loss from the Greenland ice sheet and a whole bunch of scientists from various places criticized their recent edition saying that Greenland is indeed losing ice but not quite that fast. If, as you dingbat denier cultists believe, there is a worldwide conspiracy among climate scientists to exaggerate the climate change crisis, why did all these scientists insist that the ice loss was less than the Atlas showed? The fact is, they are doing their jobs and striving for accuracy, as almost all scientists do.

Greenland is still losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

icebergs_Ply03_A06_1-660x726.jpg


Accelerated Ice Loss from Greenland
Mar 30th, 2010
(excerpt)

How do we know Greenland has been losing ice on balance? Data from two satellite missions have independently led to the same conclusion. ICESat has repeatedly measured the elevation profile of the Greenland Ice Sheet in great detail; changes over time, combined with estimates of ice compression and density, have allowed scientists to track changes in mass.Separately, the GRACE mission has provided a direct measure of mass change through time, through its unique “scale in the sky” capabilities, and is the basis for the 2004-2007 average annual loss estimate shown here.1

You complete and utter buffoon.. LOL
Oh, there you go, talking to yourself again. I suppose that's not too unusual in someone as insane as you obviously are.



"The publishers of the world’s most prestigious atlas have been caught out by Cambridge scientists exaggerating the effects of climate change."

get it? Its not a scientific peer reviewed publication. Its a atlas..
That's what I just said, numbnuts. It's an atlas, not a peer-reviewed science journal. The journals would certainly have caught the error.




The point was they exaggerated the melting ice on greenland.
Yeah, "they" being some mapmakers working for a Rupert Murdoch owned media company. They were not climate scientists and they apparently didn't bother to consult with the actual climate scientists. So what is the fuss about?





Its not open to peer review you imbecile, its contradictory to reality and satelite evidence reviewed and provided by the same scientists whose peer reviewed papers you post and cry over all the time. THEY said it was wrong, not some anti-agw protesters, not me, not Obama, the scientists who study that areas ice coverage said it.
That's what I just pointed out, you pathetic imbecile. Are you once again incapable of understanding what you read?




You unconscionable eco-whore, you have no integrity at all.. Seriously your own scientists tell you they got it wrong and rather than shut the hell up and accept that the atlas makers were wrong, you try and dispute the very scientists you support by crying peer review like an idiot. You don't care about truth, right and wrong, or anything but pushing your favored eco-religion on people.. Seriously what makes you any better than the people you claim are in the pocket of big oil? You are the same animal just on different sides... Unbelievable!

Ya' know, ol' slackjawedidiot, I really thought that it wasn't possible for you to get any more retarded than you've already been on here but you just proved me wrong.

I've just made a number of posts where I have pointed out that the scientists who study the Arctic were the ones who publicly pointed out the error and said that the mapmakers were not basing their maps on the scientific data. The scientists got it right, moron, and did what they always do - stuck to the facts. I don't know how you got the idea that I was disputing the scientists who caught the error but I suspect your extreme stupidity has a lot to do with your inability to comprehend what is going on or what people are saying to you. Too bad you're such a monumental cretin and so embarrassingly unaware of that fact.

From the article I cited in post #15

The publishers of the Times Atlas were forced to admit on Tuesday that they were wrong to claim the Greenland ice pack had shrunk by 15%, as Arctic scientists rounded on the company for misinterpreting data and failing to consult them. The humiliating climbdown for HarperCollins – part of Rupert Murdoch's publishing empire – came after key sources of data on the Greenland ice denied that their research, cited by the Times Atlas, warranted the claims.


And Greenland is still losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.
 
And Greenland is still losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

And yet, sea level has leveled off and is beginning to drop. Explain that in the context of record ice melt in greenland which is supposed to send us all scampering for high ground.

That is the problem with being a cut and paste drone thunder, you have either lost, or never had the ability to think critically about what people tell you. You either believe, or disbelieve based on your political leanings, but you don't, or can't think critically about any of it.

What does thunder say??? baaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhh
 
Last edited:
LOLOLOLOL......you retards are priceless....

So what did happen? The Times Atlas of the World, which BTW is not a peer reviewed science journal, seems to have mistakenly exaggerated ice loss from the Greenland ice sheet and a whole bunch of scientists from various places criticized their recent edition saying that Greenland is indeed losing ice but not quite that fast. If, as you dingbat denier cultists believe, there is a worldwide conspiracy among climate scientists to exaggerate the climate change crisis, why did all these scientists insist that the ice loss was less than the Atlas showed? The fact is, they are doing their jobs and striving for accuracy, as almost all scientists do.

Greenland is still losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

icebergs_Ply03_A06_1-660x726.jpg


Accelerated Ice Loss from Greenland
Mar 30th, 2010
(excerpt)

How do we know Greenland has been losing ice on balance? Data from two satellite missions have independently led to the same conclusion. ICESat has repeatedly measured the elevation profile of the Greenland Ice Sheet in great detail; changes over time, combined with estimates of ice compression and density, have allowed scientists to track changes in mass.Separately, the GRACE mission has provided a direct measure of mass change through time, through its unique “scale in the sky” capabilities, and is the basis for the 2004-2007 average annual loss estimate shown here.1

You complete and utter buffoon.. LOL
Oh, there you go, talking to yourself again. I suppose that's not too unusual in someone as insane as you obviously are.




That's what I just said, numbnuts. It's an atlas, not a peer-reviewed science journal. The journals would certainly have caught the error.





Yeah, "they" being some mapmakers working for a Rupert Murdoch owned media company. They were not climate scientists and they apparently didn't bother to consult with the actual climate scientists. So what is the fuss about?






That's what I just pointed out, you pathetic imbecile. Are you once again incapable of understanding what you read?




You unconscionable eco-whore, you have no integrity at all.. Seriously your own scientists tell you they got it wrong and rather than shut the hell up and accept that the atlas makers were wrong, you try and dispute the very scientists you support by crying peer review like an idiot. You don't care about truth, right and wrong, or anything but pushing your favored eco-religion on people.. Seriously what makes you any better than the people you claim are in the pocket of big oil? You are the same animal just on different sides... Unbelievable!

Ya' know, ol' slackjawedidiot, I really thought that it wasn't possible for you to get any more retarded than you've already been on here but you just proved me wrong.

I've just made a number of posts where I have pointed out that the scientists who study the Arctic were the ones who publicly pointed out the error and said that the mapmakers were not basing their maps on the scientific data. The scientists got it right, moron, and did what they always do - stuck to the facts. I don't know how you got the idea that I was disputing the scientists who caught the error but I suspect your extreme stupidity has a lot to do with your inability to comprehend what is going on or what people are saying to you. Too bad you're such a monumental cretin and so embarrassingly unaware of that fact.

From the article I cited in post #15

The publishers of the Times Atlas were forced to admit on Tuesday that they were wrong to claim the Greenland ice pack had shrunk by 15%, as Arctic scientists rounded on the company for misinterpreting data and failing to consult them. The humiliating climbdown for HarperCollins – part of Rupert Murdoch's publishing empire – came after key sources of data on the Greenland ice denied that their research, cited by the Times Atlas, warranted the claims.


And Greenland is still losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

Retard did you or did you not start off your first post in this topic by pointing out that the atlas was not a peer reviewed source?

Yea ya did idiot.. Cutting up my post will not save your silly ass from your own ignorance.

You got caught called out for being no better than those you cry about, and it was completely justified. YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT TRUTH< you only care about pushing your BS on us. You just argued against the very scientists you support and if that wasn't enough you now try and lie and cover it up by cutting up my post...

You are a mindless eco-shill with no more conscience than any big oil rep. Just like oldsocks crying windpower all this time, turns out he works for a company that makes them. And you two try and call the rest of us anti-agw people oil shills and worse? Up yours pal, you are no better and you just proved it...:lol:
 
And Greenland is still losing ice mass at an accelerating rate.

And yet, sea level has leveled off and is beginning to drop. Explain that in the context of record ice melt in greenland which is supposed to send us all scampering for high ground.
Sure, I'll explain that. It's easy. You're a delusional nutjob/brainwashed troll with your head firmly wedged up your ass and you fervently believe a lot of stuff that is simply wrong.

The facts on rising sea levels:

Fastest sea-level rise in two millennia linked to increasing temperatures
June 20, 2011
(excerpts)

(PhysOrg.com) -- An international research team including University of Pennsylvania scientists has shown that the rate of sea-level rise along the U.S. Atlantic coast is greater now than at any time in the past 2,000 years and that there is a consistent link between changes in global mean surface temperature and sea level. Their work will be published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on June 20.

The team found that sea level was relatively stable from 200 B.C. to 1,000 A.D. During a warm climate period beginning in the 11th century known as the Medieval Climate Anomaly, sea level rose by about half a millimeter per year for 400 years. There was then a second period of stable sea level associated with a cooler period, known as the Little Ice Age, which persisted until the late 19th century. Since the late 19th century, however, sea level has risen by more than 2 millimeters per year on average, which is the steepest rate for more than 2,100 years.
 
Last edited:
That's what I just said, numbnuts. It's an atlas, not a peer-reviewed science journal. The journals would certainly have caught the error.

Ya' know, ol' slackjawedidiot, I really thought that it wasn't possible for you to get any more retarded than you've already been on here but you just proved me wrong.

I've just made a number of posts where I have pointed out that the scientists who study the Arctic were the ones who publicly pointed out the error and said that the mapmakers were not basing their maps on the scientific data. The scientists got it right, moron, and did what they always do - stuck to the facts. I don't know how you got the idea that I was disputing the scientists who caught the error but I suspect your extreme stupidity has a lot to do with your inability to comprehend what is going on or what people are saying to you. Too bad you're such a monumental cretin and so embarrassingly unaware of that fact.

From the article I cited in post #15

The publishers of the Times Atlas were forced to admit on Tuesday that they were wrong to claim the Greenland ice pack had shrunk by 15%, as Arctic scientists rounded on the company for misinterpreting data and failing to consult them. The humiliating climbdown for HarperCollins – part of Rupert Murdoch's publishing empire – came after key sources of data on the Greenland ice denied that their research, cited by the Times Atlas, warranted the claims.

Retard did you or did you not start off your first post in this topic by pointing out that the atlas was not a peer reviewed source?

Yea ya did idiot.. Cutting up my post will not save your silly ass from your own ignorance.

You got caught called out for being no better than those you cry about, and it was completely justified. YOU DO NOT CARE ABOUT TRUTH< you only care about pushing your BS on us. You just argued against the very scientists you support and if that wasn't enough you now try and lie and cover it up by cutting up my post...

You are a mindless eco-shill with no more conscience than any big oil rep. Just like oldsocks crying windpower all this time, turns out he works for a company that makes them. And you two try and call the rest of us anti-agw people oil shills and worse? Up yours pal, you are no better and you just proved it...

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL.....even more retarded.....you really are mentally incapable of understanding plain English......LOLOLOLOL....try reading it multiple times or have someone explain it to you....I give up....
 
Sure, I'll explain that. It's easy. You're a delusional nutjob/brainwashed troll with your head firmly wedged up your ass and you fervently believe a lot of stuff that is simply wrong.

If I were a cut and paste tool such as yourself, I might actually believe you but, alas, I am a critical thinker and don't let people feed me shit and call it caviar.

The fact is that sea level has been declining for the past 2 years and is presently declining at a rate of about 5mm per year.

CU Sea Level Research Group | University of Colorado

ftp://ftp.aviso.oceanobs.com/pub/oc...l/MSL_Serie_EN_Global_IB_RWT_NoGIA_Adjust.txt
 
Sure, I'll explain that. It's easy. You're a delusional nutjob/brainwashed troll with your head firmly wedged up your ass and you fervently believe a lot of stuff that is simply wrong.

If I were a cut and paste tool such as yourself, I might actually believe you
Translation: 'You back up your posts with actual evidence but I just make pronouncements ex catheda from my bellybutton without any evidence so I resent you'.



but, alas, I am a critical thinker
LOLOLOLOL......too bad nobody has ever seen any evidence of that. More like 'crackpot thinker'.




and don't let people feed me shit and call it caviar.
Oh but you do every time you swallow the fossil fuel industry propaganda bs, uncritically.





The fact is that sea level has been declining for the past 2 years and is presently declining at a rate of about 5mm per year.

CU Sea Level Research Group | University of Colorado

I take you just pick up these websites you're citing from some denier cult blog but you don't actually bother to read them. LOL.

From your own linked source.

NASA Satellites Detect Pothole on Road to Higher Seas
(excerpts)

For the past 18 years, the U.S./French Jason-1, Jason-2 and Topex/Poseidon spacecraft have been monitoring the gradual rise of the world's ocean in response to global warming. While the rise of the global ocean has been remarkably steady for most of this time, every once in a while, sea level rise hits a speed bump. This past year, it's been more like a pothole: between last summer and this one, global sea level actually fell by about a quarter of an inch, or half a centimeter.

So what's up with the down seas, and what does it mean? Climate scientist Josh Willis of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calif., says you can blame it on the cycle of El Niño and La Niña in the Pacific. Willis said that while 2010 began with a sizable El Niño, by year's end, it was replaced by one of the strongest La Niñas in recent memory. This sudden shift in the Pacific changed rainfall patterns all across the globe, bringing massive floods to places like Australia and the Amazon basin, and drought to the southern United States.

Data from the NASA/German Aerospace Center's twin Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (Grace) spacecraft provide a clear picture of how this extra rain piled onto the continents in the early parts of 2011. "By detecting where water is on the continents, Grace shows us how water moves around the planet," says Steve Nerem, a sea level scientist at the University of Colorado in Boulder. So where does all that extra water in Brazil and Australia come from? You guessed it--the ocean. Each year, huge amounts of water are evaporated from the ocean. While most of it falls right back into the ocean as rain, some of it falls over land. "This year, the continents got an extra dose of rain, so much so that global sea levels actually fell over most of the last year," says Carmen Boening, a JPL oceanographer and climate scientist. Boening and colleagues presented these results recently at the annual Grace Science Team Meeting in Austin, Texas.

But for those who might argue that these data show us entering a long-term period of decline in global sea level, Willis cautions that sea level drops such as this one cannot last, and over the long-run, the trend remains solidly up. Water flows downhill, and the extra rain will eventually find its way back to the sea. When it does, global sea level will rise again. "We're heating up the planet, and in the end that means more sea level rise," says Willis. "But El Niño and La Niña always take us on a rainfall rollercoaster, and in years like this they give us sea-level whiplash."
 
Last edited:
In other words, you just got your ass slapped by your own words. Before you post scientific articles, you really should read them. I know, might take all day for you, but you will look a little less foolish that way, Bent.
 
LOL I love making trolingblunder go into spam mode.. It effectively nullifies him and the best part is he does it to himself.. He will post over and again using ever bigger font to try and convince anyone he isn't the idiot here... Bigger font and repeating yourself is about as idiotic as it gets...

He is a ECO- WHORE! LOL
 
Translation: 'You back up your posts with actual evidence but I just make pronouncements ex catheda from my bellybutton without any evidence so I resent you'.

It is far more than that thunder. The fact is that I not only back up my posts with evidence, but have done the math to support my position right here on this board, in public, for anyone and everyone to see and correct if I have made any error. In fact, that is where we discovered that you are, if anyone is, suffereing from the Dunning–Kruger effect.

Even though you can't do the math yourself and therefore have no inklikg as to whether I am right or wrong, you go ahead and pronounce the work I have done wrong and yourself to be the smartest guy in the room. You have been completely unable to point to and correct any math error on my part and unable as well to name any physical law that I might have misapplied, and yet, you are sure, for some reason that I am wrong.

Clearly I am more knolwedgeable on the subject than you as I am not restricted to cut and paste when I discuss the topic and I am not confused, as you so obviously are as to the differences between cause and effect. You supremely believe that if you post some bit of a study that shows that a thing has happened, that you have also proved the cause for the event. You couldn't be further from reality there. Showing that a thing has happened doesn't even begin to support any claim regarding the reason the thing happened.

Thus far, you have not produced the first bit of evidence that so called greenhouse gas emissions are the basis for clmate change while I have done the math showing why they can not be the basis for climate change.

As I have said, and you have proven before, you are a cut and paste drone, incapable of doing, or even rationally examining the basic science upon which climate pseudoscience is supposedly based.

To prove my point, I am now going to ask you to name the physical law that predicts and supports the greenhouse effect as described by climate pseudoscience and then do the math required to support your claim. You will either prove that you posess enough knowledge to at least begin to back up your superior self image or you will prove me right when I say that no basis exists for that self image outside your own mind.

Good luck to you.
 
In other words, you just got your ass slapped by your own words. Before you post scientific articles, you really should read them. I know, might take all day for you, but you will look a little less foolish that way, Bent.

I am sure that you desperately wish it were so rocks, but alas, it isn't. Sorry guy. Are you acknowledging that you are unable to see the relavence of the links I provided to the subject and need for me to draw you a picture in crayon to help you understand?
 
Last edited:
LOL I love making trolingblunder go into spam mode.. It effectively nullifies him and the best part is he does it to himself.. He will post over and again using ever bigger font to try and convince anyone he isn't the idiot here... Bigger font and repeating yourself is about as idiotic as it gets...

He is a ECO- WHORE! LOL

He has these great big buttons that are so easy to push and like one of Palov's dogs he reacts predictably and more humorously every time they are pushed and apparently doesn't even know that he has buttons, much less that he is being manipulated for the entertainment of others with them.

It is sad, but fun to watch in a train wreck sort of way.
 
The publishers of the world&#8217;s most prestigious atlas have been caught out by Cambridge scientists exaggerating the effects of climate change.

In its latest edition, the £150 Times Atlas of the World has changed a huge coastal area of Greenland from white to green, suggesting an alarming acceleration of the melting of the northern ice cap.

Accompanying publicity material declared the change reflected &#8216;concrete evidence&#8217; that 15 per cent of the ice sheet around the island &#8211; an area the size of the United Kingdom &#8211; had melted since 1999.

But last night the atlas&#8217;s publishers admitted that the &#8216;ice-free&#8217; areas could in fact still be covered by sheets of more than a quarter of a mile thick. It came after a group of leading polar scientists from Cambridge University wrote to them saying their changes were &#8216;incorrect and misleading&#8217; and that the true rate of melting has been far slower.

Experts from the University&#8217;s internationally-renowned Scott Polar Research Institute said the apparent disappearance of 115,830 sq miles of ice had no basis in science and was contradicted by recent satellite images


JammieWearingFool: Atlasgate: 'A Killer Mistake That Cannot Be Winked Away'

So let me see if I can characterize the range and breadth of the conspiracy you are telling us exists.

The majority of climatologists, and literally hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields whose research also is used to support the theory of Global warming, AND NOW some of the worlds leading CARTOLOGISTS are also in on this vast Global Warming lie?

Is that what you really believe?

That literally scores of thousands of climatologists and wealther scscientists and now cartologists, too, PLUS all the auxillary researchers whose work ALSO contributes to this theory are all in on a gigantic conspiracy to convince us that the world's climate is getting warmer?

And they are doing this, some of you claim, merely to get GRANTS to FAKE research?!

And some of you believe this?

Seriously?

Wow!

I have to hand it to you folks.

Your faith based beliefs in this conspiracy theory are truly a marvel to behold.

I don't suppose that it is possible that any of you have considered the possibility that the majority of climatologists and so forth are just honestly wrong, have you?

I mean we all know that periodically the majority of scientists ARE wrong, right?

But THAT possiblity doesn't appeal to ya'll, does it?

So instead you weave a completely implausible conspiracy theory, one involving hundreds of thousands of people, because why?

Because that conspriacy theory suits your political point of view.

Man, that's a breath-takingly insane belief system, folks.

YOur VAST CABAL OF GLOBAL-WARMING SCIENCTISTS THEORY is nuttier than pretty much any other conspiracy theory I can think of.

Understand, I say this to you and I am more than willing to consider the possibility that the whole global weirding event could be entirely nonsense and acknowledging that the world of science could be, as it sometimes has been before, TOTALLY WRONG.

But a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of co-conspirators?

Man, that is TRULY nuts.
 
Last edited:
The majority of climatologists, and literally hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields whose research also is used to support the theory of Global warming, AND NOW some of the worlds leading CARTOLOGISTS are also in on this vast Global Warming lie?

The majority of climatologists don't believe in AGW. The fact, editec is that the only true climatologists are meteorologists and precious few of them are on board the AGW express. Second, there are not hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields on board either. It is pretty tough to find a scientist, in any field, who is onboard with AGW who doesn't depend on grant money for his daily bread and those scientists are in the great minority.

The "consensus" is almost as big a hoax as AGW itself.
 
The majority of climatologists, and literally hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields whose research also is used to support the theory of Global warming, AND NOW some of the worlds leading CARTOLOGISTS are also in on this vast Global Warming lie?

The majority of climatologists don't believe in AGW. The fact, editec is that the only true climatologists are meteorologists and precious few of them are on board the AGW express. Second, there are not hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields on board either. It is pretty tough to find a scientist, in any field, who is onboard with AGW who doesn't depend on grant money for his daily bread and those scientists are in the great minority.

The "consensus" is almost as big a hoax as AGW itself.

Your denier cult delusions are incredibly insane and totally disconnected from reality. Just like you, wired&bent, and your retarded conspiracy theories.

Survey: Scientists Agree Human-Induced Global Warming is Real
UIC News Release - University of Illinois at Chicago Office of Public Affairs (MC 288)
(excerpts)

A group of 3,146 earth scientists surveyed around the world overwhelmingly agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising, and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures. Experts in academia and government research centers were e-mailed invitations to participate in the on-line poll conducted by the website questionpro.com. Only those invited could participate and computer IP addresses of participants were recorded and used to prevent repeat voting. Questions used were reviewed by a polling expert who checked for bias in phrasing, such as suggesting an answer by the way a question was worded. The nine-question survey was short, taking just a few minutes to complete.

Two questions were key: have mean global temperatures risen compared to pre-1800s levels, and has human activity been a significant factor in changing mean global temperatures. About 90 percent of the scientists agreed with the first question and 82 percent the second. In analyzing responses by sub-groups, Doran found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role. ...the near-unanimous agreement by climatologists. "They're the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it." Doran and Kendall Zimmerman conclude that "the debate on the authenticity of global warming and the role played by human activity is largely nonexistent among those who understand the nuances and scientific basis of long-term climate processes."



***
 
Doran found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role. ...the near-unanimous agreement by climatologists. "They're the ones who study and publish on climate science. So I guess the take-home message is, the more you know about the field of climate science, the more you're likely to believe in global warming and humankind's contribution to it.

The conclusion to draw is that when government pays people to produce a certain conclusion, it generally gets what it asks for. The people being polled are all toadies on the goverment payroll. If they did a study that said global warming is a hoax, they would instanly forclose any possibility of further research grants. That's how government funding has corrupted science.

The other flaws in this "poll" are two numerous to mention, such as the fact that the people taking it hand picked the persons chosen to respond. I can get any result I want in a poll if I can choose who will answer the questions. For instance, I can get 1000 cattle ranchers to conclude that vegetarianism is an offense against the laws of nature.

If the warmist toadies had a case, they would present the actual evidence rather than resorting to arguments that are not scientific like taking polls of toadies who take money from the government to produce propaganda in favor of the AGW theory.
 
LOL. The consensus does not exist, all those Scientific Societies, National Academies of Science, and major Universities are all in on a giant conspiracy in any case.

What a hoot you asses are.
 
Hey Pattycake, there are only 98 or so publishing Phd Climotologists. And 95 of them state AGW is real and a danger to our civilization. But in your book that is not a consensus. And the 2 or 3 that state otherwise are a majority. OK, we understand "Conservative" math.
 
The majority of climatologists, and literally hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields whose research also is used to support the theory of Global warming, AND NOW some of the worlds leading CARTOLOGISTS are also in on this vast Global Warming lie?

The majority of climatologists don't believe in AGW. The fact, editec is that the only true climatologists are meteorologists and precious few of them are on board the AGW express. Second, there are not hundreds of thousands of scientists in other fields on board either. It is pretty tough to find a scientist, in any field, who is onboard with AGW who doesn't depend on grant money for his daily bread and those scientists are in the great minority.

The "consensus" is almost as big a hoax as AGW itself.

I do not think you'[re right about that, WB.

When the world's leading scientific peer review journals come down on one side of the issue, they do so based on scientific CONSENSUS.

Now I freely admit that it is possible that the scientific consensus could be WRONG.

But I cannot buy into any theory that a 4 decade old conspiracy involving tens of thousands of scientists, and the auxillary support staffs, too, are all in a GRAND LIE.

To believe that is to completely ignore what we ALL KNOW aobut conspiracies.
 

Forum List

Back
Top