Here's a whole passel of scientists who think AGW is wrong

[westwall]

This is mainly directed at old fraud as he loves to point out that the whole world supposedly supports AGW theory. Well here are a whole bunch who don't....

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS' REGISTER ENDORSERS

 

[uscitizen]

And I tell you the Earth IS the center of the universe.

 

[Epsilon Delta]

107?

 

[Old Rocks]

Some of the stated 'core principles' of this group of people. Look at the first one. They do not state that this is what they see the evidence for, they state that this is what is, no other answers accepted. Now that is not science at all.

Walleyes, this is just another bunch of paid denialists more than likely subsidized by the energy companies.

Core Principles

Core Principles
Global climate is always changing in accordance with natural causes and recent changes are not unusual.

Science is rapidly evolving away from the view that humanity's emissions of carbon dioxide and other 'greenhouse gases' are a cause of dangerous climate change.

Climate models used by the IPCC* fail to reproduce known past climates without manipulation and therefore lack the scientific integrity needed for use in climate prediction and related policy decision-making.

 

[Old Rocks]

So these people do no research at all, simply deny reality, and try to spread that denial.

International Climate Science Coalition - SourceWatch

It has been found[2] that the web sites of the International Climate Science Coalition, the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, and the Australian Climate Science Coalition are all hosted at the same IP address, by a single Internet service provider in Arizona.

The ICSC site highlights news on climate skeptics from all over the world. It also propagates skeptics' conspiracy theories on climate change.[3][4]


Activities

Speech at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change
At the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, ICSC Executive Director Tom Harris gave a speech in which he discussed what he called "information sharing" and "coordinated local activism":[5][6]

[...] We need regular high-impact media coverage of the findings of leading scientists — not just one or two publications, but we need to have hundreds all over the world. We need to have a high degree of information sharing and cooperation between groups, so that when Vincent Gray for example has an article published in New Zealand, we can take the same piece and we can (say) submit it to newspapers all over North America and Europe.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

OR: How are you making out on that one sentence AGW hypothesis?

 

[jillian]

This is mainly directed at old fraud as he loves to point out that the whole world supposedly supports AGW theory. Well here are a whole bunch who don't....

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS' REGISTER ENDORSERS

a mathematician, a physicist and an engineer were the first three.

i think if i were interested in the subject, i wouldn't really be interested in the opinions of anyone who isn't a climatologist.

kind of like i wouldn't ask a dentist about a torn rotator cuff.

i do have to wonder why it matters to you so intensely to pretend humans have no effect on their environment.

 

[Old Rocks]

GHGs absorb outgoing infrared, heating the atmosphere.

 

[jillian]

So these people do no research at all, simply deny reality, and try to spread that denial.

International Climate Science Coalition - SourceWatch

It has been found[2] that the web sites of the International Climate Science Coalition, the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition, and the Australian Climate Science Coalition are all hosted at the same IP address, by a single Internet service provider in Arizona.

The ICSC site highlights news on climate skeptics from all over the world. It also propagates skeptics' conspiracy theories on climate change.[3][4]


Activities

Speech at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change
At the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change, ICSC Executive Director Tom Harris gave a speech in which he discussed what he called "information sharing" and "coordinated local activism":[5][6]

[...] We need regular high-impact media coverage of the findings of leading scientists — not just one or two publications, but we need to have hundreds all over the world. We need to have a high degree of information sharing and cooperation between groups, so that when Vincent Gray for example has an article published in New Zealand, we can take the same piece and we can (say) submit it to newspapers all over North America and Europe.

oh.. that explains it.

thanks.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

GHGs absorb outgoing infrared, heating the atmosphere.

So why don't you test your "60PPM increases cause measurable warming" in a laboratory setting?

Your hypothesis could have been "Monkeys like bananas" and you would come to the same lowbrow unscientific place

 

[editec]

This is mainly directed at old fraud as he loves to point out that the whole world supposedly supports AGW theory. Well here are a whole bunch who don't....

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS' REGISTER ENDORSERS

Good.

Reasonable men can disagree reasonably.

Science needs scientists who willing to posit theories that are not consensus.

 

[Old Rocks]

Frank, you totally stupid ass, we have already seen the proof right here on this planet, that increasing the CO2 from 280 to 387 increases the heat that the planet retains. And, given that there are all too many idiots like you, we will see how much heat that 600 ppm causes to be retained.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is mainly directed at old fraud as he loves to point out that the whole world supposedly supports AGW theory. Well here are a whole bunch who don't....

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS' REGISTER ENDORSERS

Good.

Reasonable men can disagree reasonably.

Science needs scientists who willing to posit theories that are not consensus.

Then those scientists need to provide evidence and research showing that these theories are plausable. That is where this bunch has failed.

 

[PoliticalChic]

This is mainly directed at old fraud as he loves to point out that the whole world supposedly supports AGW theory. Well here are a whole bunch who don't....

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS' REGISTER ENDORSERS

a mathematician, a physicist and an engineer were the first three.

i think if i were interested in the subject, i wouldn't really be interested in the opinions of anyone who isn't a climatologist.

kind of like i wouldn't ask a dentist about a torn rotator cuff.

i do have to wonder why it matters to you so intensely to pretend humans have no effect on their environment.

The very paucity of evidence to support the terrifying global alarmism, the environmental Armageddon, is the best evidence for the lack of rationality, and, by the same token, the supremacy of ideology, in the scientific community.

a. In a 2003 poll conducted by environmental researchers Dennis Bray and Hans von Storch of the Institute for Coastal Research in Germany, about a quarter of more than 530 climate scientists from 27 countries surveyed did not believe that “the current state of scientific knowledge is developed well enough to allow for a reasonable assessment of the effects of greenhouse gases.” About half of those polled stated that the science of climate change was not sufficiently settled to pass the issue over to policymakers. Are climate change investors living in a fool’s paradise?

b. Most people do not realize that Earthly temperatures have been appreciably higher than today many times in the past, and also lower. As recently as 6,000 years ago, it was as much as 3 degrees Celsius warmer than now. Eleven thousand five hundred years ago, while the world was coming out of the thousand-year-long “Younger Dryas” cold episode, temperatures rose about 5° C in a single decade – that is nearly 100 times faster than the 20th century’s 0.6° C warming that climate campaigners believe is a precursor to catastrophic global warming. Ibid.

c. “…new findings, suggest that changes in the output of the sun have caused most recent climate change. By comparison, variations in carbon dioxide, the gas most targeted by national climate change campaigns, have shown poor correlation with our planet's climate on long, medium and even short time scales.” ICSC Chair Professor Tim Patterson, a leading paleoclimatolgist at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada One Time Publication Rights

d. Global warming theorists believe that rising CO2 levels drive up the atmospheric temperature. But the rate and amount of warming at the beginning of the 20th century was greater than now, despite lower CO2 emissions, or why Greenland has cooled since the 1940’s, or why the Arctic was warmer in the 1920’s and 1930’s than now. (Ian Plimer, “Heaven and Earth: Global Warming, The Missing Science,” p. 438

e. Nils-Axel Mörner, is the former head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics department at Stockholm University. He claims that there is no evidence of sea level rise anywhere. A recent booklet The Greatest Lie Ever Told, published by Mörner, refers to observational records of sea levels for the past 300 years that show variations - ups and downs, but no significant trend. Nils-Axel Mörner - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Oddball]

At this pace of cooling, I suspect that the second half of 2010 could ruin the chances of getting a record high global temperature for this year. Oh, darn.

Global Average Sea Surface Temperatures Continue their Plunge Roy Spencer, Ph. D.

 

[westwall]

This is mainly directed at old fraud as he loves to point out that the whole world supposedly supports AGW theory. Well here are a whole bunch who don't....

CLIMATE SCIENTISTS' REGISTER ENDORSERS

a mathematician, a physicist and an engineer were the first three.

i think if i were interested in the subject, i wouldn't really be interested in the opinions of anyone who isn't a climatologist.

kind of like i wouldn't ask a dentist about a torn rotator cuff.

i do have to wonder why it matters to you so intensely to pretend humans have no effect on their environment.

Climatologists at the heart of the AGW controversy have been found to have altered and created data to support their agenda. Are those the kind of scientists you are talking about? The theory of plate tectonics was formulated by a astronomer. Because he was not a specialist should we ignore his ideas as the geological community actually did for 25 years?

I hate to tell you this but climatology as a science is in dire straights due to the self serving
fraud that these guys have perpetrated. They have harmed science in general as well. These are not the types of people I would be hanging my support on.

 

[westwall]

Frank, you totally stupid ass, we have already seen the proof right here on this planet, that increasing the CO2 from 280 to 387 increases the heat that the planet retains. And, given that there are all too many idiots like you, we will see how much heat that 600 ppm causes to be retained.

If that is true why has the temperature been dropping for the last 12 years bucko? La Nina explains why it is happening now. But according to your theory it should have been climbing the entire time and it clearly has not been doing that now has it? Even Phil Jones had to admit that inconvenient fact.

 

[Old Rocks]

Very interesting graphs. Note the overall ocean temperature. Hit a real high recently. Now it is down to the previous highs. And the La Nina cooling is proceeding much more rapidly than previously. Although it is nowhere near as cool as it was in 2008.

Remember 2008? Supposed to be the beginning of a real cool down according to Spencer and the rest? It was either the tenth or eighth warmest year on record. So now we are going into another La Nina, after a modest El Nino. Very much like the pattern of 2005. And 2005 was either very close to or slightly warmer than 1998. Had a bit of weather in 2005, if I remember correctly. Without a well oiled Gulf in that year.

 

[Old Rocks]

Frank, you totally stupid ass, we have already seen the proof right here on this planet, that increasing the CO2 from 280 to 387 increases the heat that the planet retains. And, given that there are all too many idiots like you, we will see how much heat that 600 ppm causes to be retained.

If that is true why has the temperature been dropping for the last 12 years bucko? La Nina explains why it is happening now. But according to your theory it should have been climbing the entire time and it clearly has not been doing that now has it? Even Phil Jones had to admit that inconvenient fact.

Come on, Walleyes, cease with the constant lying. Temperatures have been dropping in the last 12 years? 2000 to 2009 was the warmest on record, with 2005 tying 1998 for temperatures.

NASA - NASA Research Finds Last Decade was Warmest on Record, 2009 One of Warmest Years

NASA Research Finds Last Decade was Warmest on Record, 2009 One of Warmest Years WASHINGTON -- A new analysis of global surface temperatures by NASA scientists finds the past year was tied for the second warmest since 1880. In the Southern Hemisphere, 2009 was the warmest year on record.

Although 2008 was the coolest year of the decade because of a strong La Nina that cooled the tropical Pacific Ocean, 2009 saw a return to a near-record global temperatures as the La Nina diminished, according to the new analysis by NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies (GISS) in New York. The past year was a small fraction of a degree cooler than 2005, the warmest on record, putting 2009 in a virtual tie with a cluster of other years --1998, 2002, 2003, 2006, and 2007 -- for the second warmest on record.

"There's always interest in the annual temperature numbers and a given year's ranking, but the ranking often misses the point," said James Hansen, GISS director. "There's substantial year-to-year variability of global temperature caused by the tropical El Nino-La Nina cycle. When we average temperature over five or ten years to minimize that variability, we find global warming is continuing unabated."

So we are to take the yap-yap of a poster on a message board as more knowledgable than NASA? Come on, dingleberry, that old song and dance has been disproven so many times.

 

[Old Rocks]

Frank, you totally stupid ass, we have already seen the proof right here on this planet, that increasing the CO2 from 280 to 387 increases the heat that the planet retains. And, given that there are all too many idiots like you, we will see how much heat that 600 ppm causes to be retained.

If that is true why has the temperature been dropping for the last 12 years bucko? La Nina explains why it is happening now. But according to your theory it should have been climbing the entire time and it clearly has not been doing that now has it? Even Phil Jones had to admit that inconvenient fact.

Phil Jones stated that it has cooled over the last 12 years? Post a link, boy.