Well I guess if some radical left wing blogger "debunks" surveys of over 1000+ scientists and engineers, then it must be true.
Your blogger buddy John Cook (not even a climate scientist, LMFAO!) and his bogus "97% survey" is far more believable!
"smart people think like me"
I am VERY educated"
"You'd faint if you saw my W2 from 2013"
:hahahahah
Well centrist facade? I care much more about the Minnesota Vikings than any political jargon. I come to this site to argue a little bit, I would of never got into this until I seen the left lose Vitterd on this board. There is plenty to criticize about the left but it's more fun to stick up for them considering how loony some of you guys are.
The fact is simple, you continuing to post this utter bullshit shows everyone who much of an imbecile you are.
One other point: you're part of a scientifically illiterate embarrassment who actually believes "consensus" has anything to do with science.
If you actually knew how ignorant you were on this topic, you'd stop typing.
You will, however, press on.
One of the most prominent of these critics is Judith Curry, a climatologist who heads the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology. She was involved in the third IPCC assessment, which was published in 2001. But now she accuses the organization of intellectual arrogance and bias.
"All other things being equal, adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere will have a warming effect on the planet," Curry said. "However, all things are never equal, and what we are seeing is natural climate variability dominating over human impact."
Curry isn't the only one to suggest flaws in established climate models. IPCC vice chair Francis Zwiers, director of the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium at the University of Victoria in Canada, co-wrote a paper published in this month's Nature Climate Change that said climate models had "significantly" overestimated global warming over the last 20 years — and especially for the last 15 years, which coincides with the onset of the hiatus.
The models had predicted that the average global surface temperature would increase by 0.21 of a degree Celsius over this period, but they turned out to be off by a factor of four, Zwiers and his colleagues wrote. In reality, the average temperature has edged up only 0.05 of a degree Celsius over that time — which in a statistical sense is not significantly different from zero.
Shush()*
That is not "warming"
"All other things being equal, adding more greenhouse gases to the atmosphere will have a warming effect on the planet," Curry said. "However, all things are never equal, and what we are seeing is natural climate variability dominating over human impact."
Curry isn't the only one to suggest flaws in established climate models. IPCC vice chair Francis Zwiers, director of the Pacific Climate Impacts Consortium at the University of Victoria in Canada, co-wrote a paper published in this month's Nature Climate Change that said climate models had "significantly" overestimated global warming over the last 20 years — and especially for the last 15 years, which coincides with the onset of the hiatus.
The models had predicted that the average global surface temperature would increase by 0.21 of a degree Celsius over this period, but they turned out to be off by a factor of four, Zwiers and his colleagues wrote. In reality, the average temperature has edged up only 0.05 of a degree Celsius over that time — which in a statistical sense is not significantly different from zero.
Shush()*
That is not "warming"
Oh, okay.
Good 'moderate' Republicans are the ones that play nice and babysit all the Democrat statist crap while in power until the next Democrat government is sworn in. "Reasonable Republicans" are nothing more than glorified babysitters for 'Progressivism.' Gotcha.
Bet you didn't vote for Scott Walker did ya? He's one of those Ted Cruz Tea Party loons that need to be destroyed!
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
No I didn't vote for Scott Walker and I will admit I do think he is doing a decent job. Will be interesting to see what happens to the state's educational standards over time, WI was a top half stated educationally. Reason why I didn't vote for Walker is he is anti union and I dislike the Koch brothers who backed him all the way
The fact you are denying it is kind of weird, lol. You're not a very credible person. I will take NASA's word over yours any day. Sorry about that.
Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.
http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus
You are really dumb. 5% of those surveyed were climate scientists that produce more than 50% of their peer reviewed research papers on climatology. It's not 5% of climate scientists, lol. The largest survey of educated climatologists ever. Not surprised by the results. Smart people don't think like you.
