[N_Fiddledog]

stemmer stemmer:

Thanks for the find... I tried google but no luck... I'm passing this off to the global warming punks in the office...

Would you like some more recent stuff from scientists who are not what the Warmists call the 'usual suspects'.

Former head of csiros division of space science says global cooling may be on the way

12 Factors Affect Earth's Temperature; Global Cooling Could be Greater Concern by Leighton Steward, award winning geologist

PHD, atmosheric scientist Ed Blick - unsound science, Gore bad science marks, Strong and others quotes saying to fake the science. Scientific studies quoted and described.

IPCC scientist Dr. Joanne Simpson

Indian Scientists Question Man-Made Global Warming

Russian Scientists Question Man-Made Global Warming

Australian Scientist Changes His Mind About Man-Made Global Warming

Will Alexander, Emeritus Professor of Civil and Biosystems Engineering at the University of Pretoria, South Africa questions man-made global warming

Meteorology professor Hendrik Tennekes disses global warming theory

American Physical Society admits many scientists disagree with conclusions of IPCC

I've got lots more if you want em.

[BartSimpson]

commanderkai commanderkai:

jason700 jason700:

For those who think the science behind global warming is based on left-wing politics, you should take a look in the mirror. There is far more politics behind denying global warming.

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=5792

Please, the politics are on both sides of the aisle. Don't be naive.

I'd say you're a little too late with that admonition.

[hurley_108]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

commanderkai commanderkai:

Please, the politics are on both sides of the aisle. Don't be naive.

I'd say you're a little too late with that admission.

FTFY.

[Scape]

Greenhouse-Gas Emissions Drop 0.1% in Developed World

$1:

Emissions of all developed countries including the U.S., which isn't bound by Kyoto, fell 4.7 percent to 18 billion metric tons from 18.9 billion in 1990, the base year for the treaty. They dropped 17 percent for Kyoto signatories.Data isn't available for three countries that ratified Kyoto. Sixteen are on track to attain their goals.

[Wazz]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There are also numerous scientific sources that dispute alleged human causes of alleged global warming.

Who's right? As I've previously stated, the proof either way is far from solid.

Who's right??? 'Far from solid?' LOL!!

9 times out of ten these other scientists have been subsidized by vested special interests and global warming deniers in the oil, gas and energy sector.

Not too credible.

Honestly, I don't know what to say to people that seriously think that mountains of scientific data compiled by thousands of climatologists, meterologists, geologists, biologists, oceanographers etc., representing scores of scientific organizations around the globe such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science .. etc etc - all of which concur and have reached a concensus that global warming is not only a fact but also that humans are helping cause it - that their research is 'far from solid.' The fact is, it is as real as the earth is round, and the longer we delude ourselves about it and deny reality, the worse it is going to get.

[acidcomplex]

Wazz Wazz:

9 times out of ten these other scientists have been subsidized by vested special interests and global warming deniers in the oil, gas and energy sector.

As have the data sources your sighting, hmmmm i wonder if the gov has any pull with any of these scientist?...hmmm.

Wazz Wazz:

Honestly, I don't know what to say to people that seriously think that mountains of scientific data compiled by thousands of climatologists, meterologists, geologists, biologists, oceanographers etc., representing scores of scientific organizations around the globe such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union and the American Association for the Advancement of Science .. etc etc - [b]all of which concur and have reached a concensus that global warming is not only a fact but also that humans are helping cause it

So were helping cause it, big deal. In the same way I do not understand how people can worry about something that will NEVER affect them in there life time, besides having to put on an extra shirt or coat.

Do you walk to work wazz?. Use reusable bags for groceries?. Low power washer and dryer?. Low flo shower head? Do you own a car?. If you cant say yes too all of this then your a hypocrite. It drives me nuts how people think there so righteous and earth loving by turning off a light, wow big deal. You are a flat out hypocrites if you say your worried about global warming and yet only do the things that are convenient for you when it comes to global warming.

[Zipperfish]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There has been no definitive evidence either way. I'm all for tackling pollution, building fuel effecient cars etc, I'm just not convinced that the 'global warming' mantra we are being force fed by the politically activist types is kosher.

There are just too many counter arguments against human carbon emmissions being the root cause of a warming trend that has grown cooler since 2005.

I'm more concerned with the shrinking rain forests and the destruction of world wide marine life with over fishing.

Show me definitive proof and I'll have it.
A large group of like minded scientists sharing the same theory doesn't make it gospel, after all 400 years ago science said the earth was flat.
It appears they were wrong.

I think there's plenty of evidence that the planet is warming and that humans are significant contributor to it. But you'll never find "definitive proof." Such a concept doesn't exist in the physical sciences where all truths are provisional. You'll always have to make do with incomplete information.

And, with all due respect, I don't think the acitivism you refer to exists only on one side of the debate. There are several conservative think tanks who are quite activist in their approach refuting anthropogenic global wamring.

Global warming is real and will have ral and measurable negative effects for people. It will have some positive effects too, but the negatives will outweigh the positives. I think that there is too much emphasis by some AGW activists that the warming will necessarily be catastrophic. It could be, but I 'm not convinced. Africa, as usual, will get screwed. Rich countries will simply adapt.

Also, I'm with you 100% on the overfishing. I think that is real crisis that wil come home to roost in the next ten years, after which no one will be too worri3ed about global warming anymore.

[EyeBrock]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Science in the west 400 years ago was preaching the earth was flat and that the sun orbited the earth. That's a defintive fact.

News to me.

You need to read more.
Ever heard of Galileo Galilei? He dared to challenge the accepted thinking of the time.
If this is news to you I'd say you missed out on some pretty basic scientific history.

[BartSimpson]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

FTFY.

Yeah, I love you, too.

[hurley_108]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

hurley_108 hurley_108:

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

Science in the west 400 years ago was preaching the earth was flat and that the sun orbited the earth. That's a defintive fact.

News to me.

You need to read more.
Ever heard of Galileo Galilei? He dared to challenge the accepted thinking of the time.
If this is news to you I'd say you missed out on some pretty basic scientific history.

Oh I've heard of Galileo. I just didn't know it was scientists and not theologians he was challenging.

[Zipperfish]

Galileo was wrong anyway. Well, he was right about the earth orbiting the sun, but that was already pretty much accepetd at the time, even by the Church, and that wasn't what teh Church took him to task for. The church took umbrage with his view of a mechnaistic universe unwinding itself in a completely predictive manner. The Catholic philosophers at the time--and they had the best--said that there was no room for God in such a universe.

And the Church was right. At least from what we think now, the universe is inherently unpredictable and what we can know about it through science is limited, not just in practice but in theory.

[EyeBrock]

There were plenty of scientists that toed the Church line.
They jailed Galileo for his beliefs, round earth, earth orbiting the sun etc. I find it hard to believe that all this stuff was news to you, as you stated.

[hurley_108]

EyeBrock EyeBrock:

There were plenty of scientists that toed the Church line.
They jailed Galileo for his beliefs, round earth, earth orbiting the sun etc. I find it hard to believe that all this stuff was news to you, as you stated.

I'd scarcely call such people scientists. Science as we now know it began with people like Galileo. What's news to me is that his opponents may be termed scientists.

[EyeBrock]

They were in those days, people listened to them just like people listen to Al Gore, who like Galileo's opponents, isn't a scientist either.