There is a consensus...but it's not for AGW

[westwall]

An interesting article. The related links are pretty interesting as well.

97% of Scientists Do Not Believe in the Theory of Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming | MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory

 

[skookerasbil]

w0w West.........how compelling is that??? West again with the direct eye poke to the k0o0ks..............

and from that article.....................

Before quickly commenting on the cause, take a look at the effect. USA Today titles a June 22 article Report: 97 percent of scientists say man-made climate change is real. Excerpts:

The study found that 97 percent of scientific experts agree that climate change is “very likely” caused mainly by human activity.

The report is based on questions posed to 1,372 scientists. Nearly all the experts agreed that it is “very likely that anthropogenic greenhouse gases have been responsible for most of the unequivocal warming of the Earth’s average global temperature in the second half of the twentieth century.”

…..

As for the 3 percent of scientists who remain unconvinced, the study found their average expertise is far below that of their colleagues, as measured by publication and citation rates.

The study, published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences provided a hit-list of scientists whom the authors claim should not be believed on the subject of global warming. Holy politically motivated blacklist!!!! This is exactly the complaint made by credible scientists about the bias in scientific publications on climate; one of the elements of the scam highlighted by Climategate emails. Warming propagandists make systematic efforts to shut other scientists out to keep their fraudulent work from being exposed.

The authors hand picked the 1,372 scientists in their review, a small portion of the 10s of thousands of scientists who have weighed in on the subject, and made up their own criteria for determining agreement with the IPCC and for determining who’s credible and who’s not. If the public pays much attention to this paper – I personally guarantee you’ll be hearing more about the bias, misrepresentations, and misleading illogic that this paper has to offer.

Meanwhile, the IPCC is in critical condition. Warmers are trying to save it, and start up the eternal do-overs to bring it some credibility in the eyes of the non-scientific public – or at least give cover to continuing political efforts on Cap-n-Trade and government takeovers through PR tricks like reorganization and instruction manuals for good conduct. Why isn’t there a law demanding that these people let the dead horse rest in peace?




Its all a gigantic scam...........but I must say, those who perpetuate this hoax are brilliant as far as duping the public. So many Mr adn Mrs Stupids out there................just buy things on face value and never consider the real substance of the shit............

 

[skookerasbil]

Awesome find West................

 

[skookerasbil]

All you global warming true believers are so fcukking pathetic.........you were the same people who spent your early years jumping on every fcukking popular bandwagon you could hop aboard. You were last picked on the schoolyard team as a kid and were told to go walk in the woods during the games of spin the bottle as an adolescent. Highly likely you carrreid one of those gay lunch boxes to school too compliments of Mom...........The Prettyest Pony!!!! And you repeatedly got your asses kicked!!!! So............of fcukking course you were going to spend life taking the follow the leader save the world route because you arrived in adulthood having accomplished nothing except being publically humiliated on a consistent basis. Thats why these same people are also ALL fcukking limpwristers..........to them, no war is a good war. They need depserately to be represented by a cause............you see, it provides somethng meaningful in an otherwise dreadful existence. Its the proud oddball syndrome!!!

 

[konradv]

All you global warming true believers are so fcukking pathetic.........you were the same people who spent your early years jumping on every fcukking popular bandwagon you could hop aboard. You were last picked on the schoolyard team as a kid and were told to go walk in the woods during the games of spin the bottle as an adolescent. Highly likely you carrreid one of those gay lunch boxes to school too compliments of Mom...........The Prettyest Pony!!!! And you repeatedly got your asses kicked!!!! So............of fcukking course you were going to spend life taking the follow the leader save the world route because you arrived in adulthood having accomplished nothing except being publically humiliated on a consistent basis. Thats why these same people are also ALL fcukking limpwristers..........to them, no war is a good war. They need depserately to be represented by a cause............you see, it provides somethng meaningful in an otherwise dreadful existence. Its the proud oddball syndrome!!!

Who's jumping on the bandwagon? Most of the people who discount AGW don't do so because of the science, but because they dislike Al Gore. Hardly a logical reason!!! As a matter of fact it's just part of the right wing kookiness we see so much of these days running from Beck and Limbaugh to the Tea Party.

 

[westwall]

All you global warming true believers are so fcukking pathetic.........you were the same people who spent your early years jumping on every fcukking popular bandwagon you could hop aboard. You were last picked on the schoolyard team as a kid and were told to go walk in the woods during the games of spin the bottle as an adolescent. Highly likely you carrreid one of those gay lunch boxes to school too compliments of Mom...........The Prettyest Pony!!!! And you repeatedly got your asses kicked!!!! So............of fcukking course you were going to spend life taking the follow the leader save the world route because you arrived in adulthood having accomplished nothing except being publically humiliated on a consistent basis. Thats why these same people are also ALL fcukking limpwristers..........to them, no war is a good war. They need depserately to be represented by a cause............you see, it provides somethng meaningful in an otherwise dreadful existence. Its the proud oddball syndrome!!!

Who's jumping on the bandwagon? Most of the people who discount AGW don't do so because of the science, but because they dislike Al Gore. Hardly a logical reason!!! As a matter of fact it's just part of the right wing kookiness we see so much of these days running from Beck and Limbaugh to the Tea Party.

konrad,

This makes zero sense. Scientists don't like AGW theory because it is wrong. Myself and many others have shown you repeatedly where the AGW proponents have cherry picked data and manufactured it wholesale. THAT is the reason why scientists don't like your theory my friend. Because it is wrong.

 

[KissMy]

Most of the people who discount AGW don't do so because of the science, but because they dislike Al Gore.

(AGW) = Anthropogenic Global Warming NOT Al Gore Warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

An interesting article. The related links are pretty interesting as well.

97% of Scientists Do Not Believe in the Theory of Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming | MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory

From the lie in the title to all the following lies, this is precisely what one would expect of our faux geologist.

And still the fact remains, in spite of all the lying blogs claiming otherwise, all the scientific societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities state that AGW is a fact, and a clear and present danger.

Now Walleyes, do you want me to once more post all the position papers from the various Geological societies from around the world concerning AGW?

 

[westwall]

An interesting article. The related links are pretty interesting as well.

97% of Scientists Do Not Believe in the Theory of Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming | MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory

From the lie in the title to all the following lies, this is precisely what one would expect of our faux geologist.

And still the fact remains, in spite of all the lying blogs claiming otherwise, all the scientific societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities state that AGW is a fact, and a clear and present danger.

Now Walleyes, do you want me to once more post all the position papers from the various Geological societies from around the world concerning AGW?

Don't tell these guys


US Government Halts Funds For Climate Unit

And the postion papers are promulgated by the politically motivated leaders of the organisations (and who not coincidentally derive most of their grants from that support, duh!) not the rank and file membership who for the most part DO NOT agree with AGW.

 

[Sarah G]

An interesting article. The related links are pretty interesting as well.

97% of Scientists Do Not Believe in the Theory of Catastrophic Man-Made Global Warming | MND: Your Daily Dose of Counter-Theory

97%? Please..

 

[Old Rocks]

And in due time, beaucratic time, the funding will resume. In the meantime, here is what real geologists say concerning GHGs and global warming

The Geological Society of America - Position Statement on Global Climate Change

Given the knowledge gained from paleoclimatic studies, several long-term causes of the current warming trend can be eliminated. Changes in Earth’s tectonism and its orbit are far too slow to have played a significant role in a rapidly changing 150-year trend. At the other extreme, large volcanic eruptions have cooled global climate for a year or two, and El Niño episodes have warmed it for about a year, but neither factor dominates longer-term trends.

As a result, greenhouse gas concentrations, which can be influenced by human activities, and solar fluctuations are the principal remaining factors that could have changed rapidly enough and lasted long enough to explain the observed changes in global temperature. Although the 3rd IPCC report allowed that solar fluctuations might have contributed as much as 30% of the warming since 1850, subsequent observations of Sun-like stars (Foukal et al., 2004) and new simulations of the evolution of solar sources of irradiance variations (Wang et al., 2005) have reduced these estimates. The 4th (2007) IPCC report concluded that changes in solar irradiance, continuously measured by satellites since 1979, account for less than 10% of the last 150 years of warming.

Greenhouse gases remain as the major explanation. Climate model assessments of the natural and anthropogenic factors responsible for this warming conclude that rising anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases have been an increasingly important contributor since the mid-1800s and the major factor since the mid-1900s (Meehl et al., 2004). The CO2 concentration in the atmosphere is now ~30% higher than peak levels that have been measured in ice cores spanning 800,000 years of age, and the methane concentration is 2.5 times higher. About half of Earth’s warming has occurred through the basic heat-trapping effect of the gases in the absence of any feedback processes. This “clear-sky” response to climate is known with high certainty. The other half of the estimated warming results from the net effect of feedbacks in the climate system: a very large positive feedback from water vapor; a smaller positive feedback from snow and ice albedo; and sizeable, but still uncertain, negative feedbacks from clouds and aerosols. The vertical structure of observed changes in temperature and water vapor in the troposphere is consistent with the anthropogenic greenhouse-gas “fingerprint” simulated by climate models (Santer et al., 2008). Considered in isolation, the greenhouse-gas increases during the last 150 years would have caused a warming larger than that actually measured, but negative feedback from clouds and aerosols has offset part of the warming. In addition, because the oceans take decades to centuries to respond fully to climatic forcing, the climate system has yet to register the full effect of gas increases in recent decades.

 

[Old Rocks]

More of what real geologists have to say

AGU Statement Regarding the Recent Release of E-mails Hacked from the Climate Research Unit at University of East Anglia | GIS in Education

The American Geophysical Union (AGU) has received a number of inquiries asking about our response to the release of e-mail hacked from the Climate Research Unit at University of East Anglia. AGU finds it offensive that these emails were obtained by illegal cyber attacks and they are being exploited to distort the scientific debate about the urgent issue of climate change.

AGU's position statement on climate change

AGU reaffirms the position statement approved by AGU Council in 2007. This statement is based on the large body of scientific evidence that Earth's climate is warming and that human activity is a contributing factor. Nothing in the University of East Anglia hacked e-mails represents a significant challenge to that body of scientific evidence.

AGU policy requires that all position statements be reviewed after four years and updated as necessary. AGU's position statement on climate change will be reviewed in 2011 and modified as needed to reflect evidence of recent scientific research.

 

[westwall]

Yep the political boards are in lockstep with the AGW cultists (I will use the pejorative term so long as your kind use the pejorative term denier) and if you bothered to do a little reseach of your own you would see they get their funding from the same sources, but that would'nt have any effect at all would it?....nahhhh.