For any lurkers, here is what the American Institute of Physics has to say on the subject;
The Carbon Dioxide Greenhouse Effect
You mean that's what the toadies who run the American Institute of Physics have to say on the subject. They don't speak for the rank and file.
Now Pattycake, show a site to prove that, or be branded the liar that you are.
In fact, there has been one Scientific Society that changed it's statement on global warming. That was the American Association of Petroleum Geologists. The people at the head of that society created a policy statement flat out denying the existance of global warming. The membership threatoned to not renew unless the policy statement was changed. So they changed it to a neutral statement.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Global warming controversy
In 2006 the AAPG was criticized for selecting Michael Crichton for their Journalism Award "for his recent science-based thriller State of Fear", in which Crichton exposed his skeptical view of global warming, and for Jurassic Park.[2] Daniel P. Schrag, a geochemist who directs the Harvard University Center for the Environment, called the award "a total embarrassment" that he said "reflects the politics of the oil industry and a lack of professionalism" on the association's part.[3] The award has since been renamed the "Geosciences in the Media" Award.[4]
The criticism drew attention to the AAPG's 1999 position statement[5] formally rejecting the likelihood of human influence on recent climate. The Council of the American Quaternary Association wrote in a criticism of the award that the "AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming."[6]
As recently as March 2007, articles in the newsletter of the AAPG Division of Professional Affairs stated that "the data does not support human activity as the cause of global warming"[7] and characterize the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reports as "wildly distorted and politicized."[8]
[edit]
2007 AAPG revised positionAcknowledging that the association's previous policy statement on Climate Change was "not supported by a significant number of our members and prospective members",[9] AAPG's formal stance was reviewed and changed in July 2007.
The new statement formally accepts human activity as at least one contributor to carbon dioxide increase, but does not confirm its link to climate change, saying its members are "divided on the degree of influence that anthropogenic CO2 has" on climate. AAPG also stated support for "research to narrow probabilistic ranges on the effect of anthropogenic CO2 on global climate."[10]
AAPG also withdrew its earlier criticism of other scientific organizations and research stating, "Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through NAS, AGU, AAAS, and AMS. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum case scenarios forecast in some models."
Your shit don't stink, does it? Most of your posts is nothing but a religious faith in a political structure that only death could separate you from. You toss a thin rime of science-y looking stuff to it to try and justify your political desires and think you're some hot shit. Nothing can be 'proven' to you, but you can be exposed for what you are to others ignorant of your history, and that is you're just another hack pimping global fascism with a green dress.
