Over 400 Prominent Scientists Dispute Man-Made Global Warming

[the iron horse]

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...8-3c63dc2d02cb


Reading is fun

[BVS]

So then burn, burn, burn as much as you want, it's not your fault.

[financeguy]

The solar radiation nonsense cited by a few of them has already debunked, so we can discount that in the first place.

Secondly, can you cite any (even one would be a start) peer reviewed studies produced by any of these 400 scientists which demonstrate that climate change is not caused by increased CO2?

[mystery girl]

The man-made global warming sceptics seem to think that just because it can't *conclusively* be proved that humans are contributing significantly to global warming, or just because it is possible to find other explanations for the warming, we shouldn't worry too much about it. This seems like flawed logic to me, because I think they're seeing something that is quite complex in a very simplistic way. I think that the evidence for man-made climate change is much stronger than the evidence against it. And even if this was not so, isn't it better to be on the safe side about something like this, something that will affect the future of the entire human race? Humans have never been the smartest of creatures though, so I'm guessing people will continue to live in comfort by burning fossil fuels until it is shown beyond doubt that global-warming is man made. By then, however, it may be too late to stop the destruction that rising temperatures will bring.

[martha]

Originally posted by mystery girl
And even if this was not so, isn't it better to be on the safe side about something like this, something that will affect the future of the entire human race?

This is the question I like to bring up, too. If the global warming people are wrong, what harm has been done in weaning people away from non-renewable, polluting resources? If the global warming people are correct, wasn't it a good idea to listen to them?

[CTU2fan]

Originally posted by martha


This is the question I like to bring up, too. If the global warming people are wrong, what harm has been done in weaning people away from non-renewable, polluting resources? If the global warming people are correct, wasn't it a good idea to listen to them?

Remember these are some of the same folks who'd tell you to go ahead and smoke 2 packs a day because nonsmokers get cancer too.

[DaveC]

Originally posted by martha

If the global warming people are wrong, what harm has been done in weaning people away from non-renewable, polluting resources?

The oil & gas companies that support the studies and pay for their experiments won't keep paying.

There's the harm.

[melon]

Originally posted by the iron horse
Reading is fun

Apparently as long as you don't read something that contradicts your predetermined ideology.

At that rate, there's really no point to reading at all.

[Canadiens1131]

400 scientists compared with how many who support the theory?




Numbers are fun

[verte76]

Yeah, more scientists support the global warming thing, don't they? This is from the Senate minority--Republicans supporting Bush.

[MrsSpringsteen]

I'd love some global warming right now where I live, it's f'ing miserable

[randhail]

Originally posted by MrsSpringsteen
I'd love some global warming right now where I live, it's f'ing miserable

Incorrect. The weather in New England has been the best we've had in years. Here's hoping in continues into the next few months.

[DaveC]

Randhail, you've got to be kidding.

[randhail]

Not in the slightest. You will never hear me complain about the snow, cold, or darkness. Winter is nature at its best.

[anitram]

I hate winter.

I miss my Mediterranean weather.

[Irvine511]

i miss new england winters. from december to march. and then i'm very glad to live in DC from march until late may. and then i want to be back in new england from june thorugh mid-september.

[coemgen]

the iron horse, I know faith plays a part in your life - how do you respond to verses telling us to take care of the Earth?

[verte76]

I remember New England winters. We lived in Massachusetts when I was a kid. They were cold as hell!

[joyfulgirl]

Originally posted by the iron horse
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...8-3c63dc2d02cb


Reading is fun

Reading sure is fun. Here's some reading I did today.

I follow this geeky blog http://scienceblogs.com/effectmeasur...ather.php#more on mostly health related stuff but sometimes they stray into other areas, like today, there's this piece on climate change, which I found amusing:

Knowing which way the weather man blows

The 60s radical group, the Weathermen, took their name from a Bob Dylan song, Subterranean Homesick Blues: s' "You don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows." Now we have the converse. You don't need to break wind to know this weatherman blows. On his blog, Chris Allen, the TV weatherman from WBKO, Bowling Green, Kentucky, explains to us why he doesn't believe that humans are responsible for climate change. He is quick to say that just because he doesn't have a "Dr." in front of his name is no reason we shouldn't take his arguments seriously. We agree. This is why we shouldn't take his arguments seriously:

My biggest argument against putting the primary blame on humans for climate change is that it completely takes God out of the picture. It must have slipped these people's minds that God created the heavens and the earth and has control over what's going on. (Dear Lord Jesus...did I just open a new pandora's box?) Yeah, I said it. Do you honestly believe God would allow humans to destroy the earth He created? Of course, if you don't believe in God and creationism then I can see why you would easily buy into the whole global warming fanfare. I think in many ways that's what this movement is ultimately out to do - rid the mere mention of God in any context. What these environmentalists are actually saying is "we know more than God - we're bigger than God - God is just a fantasy - science is real...He isn't...listen to US!" I have a huge problem with that. (Chris's Blog, WBKO; hat tip Gristmill)

Chris Allen is no ordinary weather mannequin. Not at all. He's one of the Imhofe 400, one of whackjob Senator James Imhofe's list of "400 prominent scientists" who aren't part of the scientific consensus on climate change.

Chris Allen deserves to be even more prominent, so I'm doing my part.

So I scrolled like a mile down the actual senate report until I found him and here's the quote by him they included in the report:

Meteorologist Chris Allen of Kentucky Fox affiliate WBKO dismissed what he termed "consensus nonsense" on global warming. "But, just because major environmental groups, big media and some politicians are buying this hook, line and sinker doesn't mean as a TV weatherperson I am supposed to act as a puppy on a leash and follow along," Allen said in his blog titled "Still Not Convinced" on February 7, 2007. "All of this (global warming alarmism) is designed to get your money and then guilt you in to how you live your life," Allen explained. Allen has the Seal of Approval of the National Weather Association. "As I have stated before, not only do I believe global climate change exists - it has always existed. There have been times of global warming and cooling," Allen concluded. (LINK) "If there is a consensus among scientists about man-made global warming, then at what temperature would they all agree the earth should be before they say global warming no longer exists? The answer - there is not a scientific consensus and will never be. And if there were one, they would not agree as to what temperature the earth needs to be ‘normal' again," Allen wrote in another blog post on June 5, 2007.

In fairness, I'm sure not all of them are this stupid but maybe the report should have only included 399 "scientists."

[INDY500]

If there is a consensus among scientists about man-made global warming, then at what temperature would they all agree the earth should be before they say global warming no longer exists? The answer - there is not a scientific consensus and will never be. And if there were one, they would not agree as to what temperature the earth needs to be ‘normal' again," Allen wrote in another blog post on June 5, 2007.

This is actually a good point. 25,000 years ago, most of what is now Canada and the Northern United States was under 1000 ft of ice. Siberian and Alaska were connected by an ice-bridge.
What is the "restore default" temperature of the Earth?