"No consensus. Then how many qualified PhD level scientists who specialize in the field are calling AGW fraudulent etc. Even that big list that has been cited time and time again has fewer than 100 PhD level scientists are on it. And most of those who are do not specialize in climate research. Many of those on the list don't even have a PhD (a minority have a Master's) or have a fiduciary interest in denying global warming."
Every heard of the Oregon Petition? Text: We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind. There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth. As of 2008, the petition's website states that "The current list of 31,072 petition signers includes 9,021 PhD; 6,961 MS; 2,240 MD and DVM; and 12,850 BS or equivalent academic degrees. Most of the MD and DVM signers also have underlying degrees in basic science."[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition#cite_note-qualifications-1> The petition sponsors state the following numbers of individuals from each discipline:[2]<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Petition#cite_note-qualifications-1> - Atmospheric, environmental, and Earth sciences: 3,697 - Computer and mathematical sciences: 903 - Physics and aerospace sciences: 5,691 - Chemistry: 4,796 - Biology and agriculture: 2,924 - Medicine: 3,069 - Engineering and general science: 9,992 "So you made the claim that there is no consensus demonstrate using the scientific literature that there is a controversy - use journal articles and conference presentations." Here. http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html You'll ignore it, but so be it. "Otherwise you are just bullshipping." Sure. In your eyes, I'll be "bullshippping" regardless of what I post. Here's a nice summary for those interested in why GW is so popular in political circles: http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2008/12/24/global_warming_rope-a-dope/page/full/ J - Ninety percent of politicians give the other ten percent a bad reputation. - Henry Kissinger Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. - John Quinton ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:346566 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
