Let's see what the anti-science group thinks... lol
Scottcarter - Global warming isn't real because scientists have been wrong before
NFLTrends - Global warming isn't real because there was an ice age
Gas Man - Global warming isn't real because it snowed in places
Acebb - Global warming isn't real because I found some .com articles telling me so
Sheriff Joe - Just normal sheriff joe bullshit
Just hilarious. These are how anti-scientific minds think. Aka... conservatives.
Got to love watching them try.
Scottcarter - Global warming isn't real because scientists have been wrong before
NFLTrends - Global warming isn't real because there was an ice age
Gas Man - Global warming isn't real because it snowed in places
Acebb - Global warming isn't real because I found some .com articles telling me so
Sheriff Joe - Just normal sheriff joe bullshit
Just hilarious. These are how anti-scientific minds think. Aka... conservatives.
Got to love watching them try.
lets see what the anti science AK says .... lol
"Obama says its man made so it must be true"
"man made Global warming is real because I found some .com articles telling me so
"government are always up front front, have no hidden agendas and always tell us the truth so man made global warming must be true"
"throughout history the government and certain scientist who rely of government funding have always been correct about all sorts of things"
"obey"
"I choose to ignore anything by scientists, government and climatologists that discounts any possibility that global climate change isn't man made"
"
| . Top Scientists say global warming is a lie ______________________________ | |
| 10 Dec 08 – More than 650 international scientists are about to make them selves heard at this week's UN global warming conference in Poland. They are there to debunk claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore. Many current and former UN IPCC scientists have put out a report that debunks global warming. They say that it is all political hype, and point out that the earth may actually be cooling. The 650 dissenting scientists are more than 12 times the number of UN scientists (52) who authored the media hyped IPCC 2007 Summary for Policymakers. The U.S. Senate report is the latest evidence of the growing groundswell of scientific opposition rising to challenge the UN and Gore. Scientific meetings are now being dominated by a growing number of skeptical scientists. The prestigious International Geological Congress, dubbed the geologists' equivalent of the Olympic Games, was held in Norway in August 2008 and prominently featured the voices and views of scientists skeptical of man-made global warming fears. [See Full report Here: & See: Skeptical scientists overwhelm conference: '2/3 of presenters and question-askers were hostile to, even dismissive of, the UN IPCC' ] A hint of what the upcoming report contains: “I am a skeptic…Global warming has become a new religion.” - Nobel Prize Winner for Physics, Ivar Giaever. “Since I am no longer affiliated with any organization nor receiving any funding, I can speak quite frankly….As a scientist I remain skeptical.” - Atmospheric Scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson, the first woman in the world to receive a PhD in meteorology and formerly of NASA who has authored more than 190 studies and has been called “among the most preeminent scientists of the last 100 years.” Warming fears are the “worst scientific scandal in the history…When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists.” - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist. “The IPCC has actually become a closed circuit; it doesn’t listen to others. It doesn’t have open minds… I am really amazed that the Nobel Peace Prize has been given on scientifically incorrect conclusions by people who are not geologists,” - Indian geologist Dr. Arun D. Ahluwalia at Punjab University and a board member of the UN-supported International Year of the Planet. “The models and forecasts of the UN IPCC "are incorrect because they only are based on mathematical models and presented results at scenarios that do not include, for example, solar activity.” - Victor Manuel Velasco Herrera, a researcher at the Institute of Geophysics of the National Autonomous University of Mexico “It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don’t buy into anthropogenic global warming.” - U.S Government Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA. “Even doubling or tripling the amount of carbon dioxide will virtually have little impact, as water vapour and water condensed on particles as clouds dominate the worldwide scene and always will.” – . Geoffrey G. Duffy, a professor in the Department of Chemical and Materials Engineering of the University of Auckland, NZ. “After reading [UN IPCC chairman] Pachauri's asinine comment [comparing skeptics to] Flat Earthers, it's hard to remain quiet.” - Climate statistician Dr. William M. Briggs, who specializes in the statistics of forecast evaluation, serves on the American Meteorological Society's Probability and Statistics Committee and is an Associate Editor of Monthly Weather Review. “For how many years must the planet cool before we begin to understand that the planet is not warming? For how many years must cooling go on?" - Geologist Dr. David Gee the chairman of the science committee of the 2008 International Geological Congress who has authored 130 plus peer reviewed papers, and is currently at Uppsala University in Sweden. “Gore prompted me to start delving into the science again and I quickly found myself solidly in the skeptic camp…Climate models can at best be useful for explaining climate changes after the fact.” - Meteorologist Hajo Smit of Holland, who reversed his belief in man-made warming to become a skeptic, is a former member of the Dutch UN IPCC committee. “Many [scientists] are now searching for a way to back out quietly (from promoting warming fears), without having their professional careers ruined.” - Atmospheric physicist James A. Peden, formerly of the Space Research and Coordination Center in Pittsburgh. “Creating an ideology pegged to carbon dioxide is a dangerous nonsense…The present alarm on climate change is an instrument of social control, a pretext for major businesses and political battle. It became an ideology, which is concerning.” - Environmental Scientist Professor Delgado Domingos of Portugal, the founder of the Numerical Weather Forecast group, has more than 150 published articles. “CO2 emissions make absolutely no difference one way or another….Every scientist knows this, but it doesn’t pay to say so…Global warming, as a political vehicle, keeps Europeans in the driver’s seat and developing nations walking barefoot.” - Dr. Takeda Kunihiko, vice-chancellor of the Institute of Science and Technology Research at Chubu University in Japan. “The [global warming] scaremongering has its justification in the fact that it is something that generates funds.” - Award-winning Paleontologist Dr. Eduardo Tonni, of the Committee for Scientific Research in Buenos Aires and head of the Paleontology Department at the University of La Plata. # # |
But, but, but...fratfraud said 97% of scientists said Al Gore was right!
How can this be????
And people wonder why the Kenyan has the worst approval rating EVER and the only people who can even stomach him are brainwashed gullible students just like fratfraud.
Why is NASA being ordered to parrot this radical left nonsense? What does CLIMATE have to do with AERONAUTICS AND SPACE? face)(*^%
Small wonder this illegitimate, radical regime has lost its moral right to govern.
Elections have consequences.
How can this be????
And people wonder why the Kenyan has the worst approval rating EVER and the only people who can even stomach him are brainwashed gullible students just like fratfraud.
Why is NASA being ordered to parrot this radical left nonsense? What does CLIMATE have to do with AERONAUTICS AND SPACE? face)(*^%
Small wonder this illegitimate, radical regime has lost its moral right to govern.
Elections have consequences.
Ha, that is such old news. Over 80% of the people on that list aren't even in fields relevant to climate study. Here's a more precise study of actual scientists who's work involves studying climatology.
We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors' self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article
We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors' self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.
http://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024/article
face)(*^%
oh the ironyOriginally Posted by akphidelt
Let's see what the anti-science group thinks... lol
Acebb - Global warming isn't real because I found some .com articles telling me so
Just hilarious. These are how anti-scientific minds think. .
Got to love watching them try.
Results show that overall, 90% of participants answered “risen” to question
and 82% answered yes to question 2.
In general, as the level of active research
and specialization in climate science
increases, so does agreement with the two
primary questions (Figure 1). In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgeable respondents (with regard to climate
change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% oftheir recent peer- reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total).
Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf
More actual studies related to actual climate scientists. Not just a list of people from across the world who agreed to sign a petition, in which very few are actually scientists who produce research related papers on climate change.
and 82% answered yes to question 2.
In general, as the level of active research
and specialization in climate science
increases, so does agreement with the two
primary questions (Figure 1). In our survey, the most specialized and knowledgeable respondents (with regard to climate
change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% oftheir recent peer- reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total).
Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf
More actual studies related to actual climate scientists. Not just a list of people from across the world who agreed to sign a petition, in which very few are actually scientists who produce research related papers on climate change.
