Scientists State Obama Wrong on Climate Change

[Sinatra]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

 

[elvis]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

but but, they gave St. Albert an academy award and a peace prize.

 

[auditor0007]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

This one has already been explained. These may be scientists, but they're not climatologists. It makes a difference. The climatologists have millions of dollars in government grants riding on their being right.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

Yes, scientists gathered by the Cato Institute, a far right wing political think tank. So you have 30 or 40 there, against all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the whole world. Seems like an overwhelming consensus of scientists agree with evidence for AGW and the danger it represents.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

This one has already been explained. These may be scientists, but they're not climatologists. It makes a difference. The climatologists have millions of dollars in government grants riding on their being right.

The scientist that accepts a government grant for studying a subject, get the grant for the study, not the conclusion. What is expected is that he or she will present all the information that they can gather, all observations that are relevant, and try to reach an understanding of the process that they are studying.

The evidence and observations are far more important than the conclusion.

 

[del]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

This one has already been explained. These may be scientists, but they're not climatologists. It makes a difference. The climatologists have millions of dollars in government grants riding on their being right.

The scientist that accepts a government grant for studying a subject, get the grant for the study, not the conclusion. What is expected is that he or she will present all the information that they can gather, all observations that are relevant, and try to reach an understanding of the process that they are studying.

The evidence and observations are far more important than the conclusion.

you've obviously never written a grant request.

 

[Skull Pilot]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

Yes, scientists gathered by the Cato Institute, a far right wing political think tank. So you have 30 or 40 there, against all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the whole world. Seems like an overwhelming consensus of scientists agree with evidence for AGW and the danger it represents.

you're always quick to excoriate scientific investigation funded by private enterprises as being biased, but you conveniently ignore that fact that scientific studies funded by government grants have the same propensity to be biased. it's disingenuous at best.

 

[Old Rocks]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

Yes, scientists gathered by the Cato Institute, a far right wing political think tank. So you have 30 or 40 there, against all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the whole world. Seems like an overwhelming consensus of scientists agree with evidence for AGW and the danger it represents.

you're always quick to excoriate scientific investigation funded by private enterprises as being biased, but you conveniently ignore that fact that scientific studies funded by government grants have the same propensity to be biased. it's disingenuous at best.

About WHOI
WHOI is the world's largest private, nonprofit ocean research, engineering and education organization.

» Learn more
Home : Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

Abrupt Climate Change : Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

 

[xsited1]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

Yes, scientists gathered by the Cato Institute, a far right wing political think tank. So you have 30 or 40 there, against all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the whole world. Seems like an overwhelming consensus of scientists agree with evidence for AGW and the danger it represents.

Cato is a Libertarian Organization. They are about as far from a 'far right-wing political think tank' as the Daily Kos or the Huffington Post.

 

[PoliticalChic]

http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange/cato_climate.pdf

Yes, scientists gathered by the Cato Institute, a far right wing political think tank. So you have 30 or 40 there, against all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the whole world. Seems like an overwhelming consensus of scientists agree with evidence for AGW and the danger it represents.

The Heartland Institute - Welcome to the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change
heartland 2008 Conference

2009 International Conference on Climate Change: Update #3
comments on the 2009 conference

Global Warming Facts: What's New
2009 Conference

Not PC: "Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate" - NIPCC
NIPCC