The vast majority of climate SCIENTISTS say the human component of climate change is the primary cause of the climate change we are seeing. Let's separate science from politicians. We didn't elect our politicians on the basis of knowledge of science.
Climate movement grandpa James Hansen says the Green New Deal is ‘nonsense’ By Zoya Teirstein on Apr 24, 2019
That is an appeal to an invisible authority argument. Especially when huge numbers of climate scientists are not in agreement.
As usual you make claims not in evidence and supply no data to review. You should at least provide your usual cherry picked list from an obscure website.
No i replied to the claims that are cherry picked that never show us the list of those scientists they allege are in agreement.
The server here would not support the whole list and the software is not made to support it either, it can be found here however: https://skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm You're Welcome.
Obviously I have, thus did I provide it....what is your problem with doing the same as it contains very important and pertinent information. Are you ascared?
Challenging Climate Change: Some 'Inconvenient Facts This is not from Curry but from a Geologist Gregory Wrightstone Check out what he reports. Warming is good. Remember the low figure you read a lot? How it got down to 180 ppm? And now it is up to 420 ppm? Below 150 ppm, we will not survive. We ducked a bullet when ppm started rising. Earth is greening again. Warm is healthy.
Let's see here...I'm trying to follow the denier progression. 1) No such thing as climate change. 2) Well, maybe but its snowing. 3) An Ice Age is coming. 4) Warming is natural and happens all the time. 5) There is no consensus in science...Listen to this weathermen. 6) The consensus is a worldwide conspiracy. 7) Okay maybe its getting warmer but that's a good thing. Did I miss anything?
Dr Soon speaks of how the Sun works The Sun Also Warms: Dr. Willie Soon Shows the Sun-Climate Connection
The corollary is the Alarmist explanation 1. Man is in charge of Global climate 2. When it snows and packs ice in the mountains, all it proved is weather 3. When it warms a bit, that is proof man is warming earth. (strange one sided explanation) 4, Ice ages ended and will never return, But this means the actual evidence is wrong 5. Warming has never happened until man invented the automobile and airplane 6. When scientists do not agree with this alleged consensus, bellyache that they must work for a major oil firm. 7. Ignore weathermen commenting all the comment on is .... egad weather. 8. Ignore that climate really is composed of ... egads weather. How can that be? 9. Ignore that wealth is built from blaming humans. But point just at oil firms. 10. Forget that in the late 1800s, Earth was nearing the extinction level since CO2 was dangerously at low levels.
Brilliant Marc Morano Skewers Climate Alarmists Pat and Stu Published on Dec 13, 2013 December 13, 2013 Pat&Stu interview Marc Morano from ClimateDepot.com about the dirty tactics climate alarmists use!
http://www.petitionproject.org/review_article.php Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research Most scientists have a detailed knowledge of their own narrow field of specialization, a general knowledge of fundamental science, an understanding of the scientific method, and a mental model that encompasses a broad range of scientific disciplines. This model serves as the basis of their thoughts about scientific questions. When a scientist desires to refine his understanding of a specific scientific subject, he often begins by reading one or more review articles about that topic. As he reads, he compares the facts given in the review with his mental model of the subject, refining his model and updating it with current information. Review articles do not present new discoveries. The essential facts given in the review must be referenced to the peer-reviewed scientific research literature, so that the reader can check the assertions and conclusions of the article and obtain more detailed information about aspects that interest him. A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is circulated with the petition. To view the entire article in html,150-dpi PDF, 300-dpi PDF, 600-dpi PDF, Spanish or figures alone inpowerpoint or flash, click on the appropriate item in this sentence. The factual information cited in this article is referenced to the underlying research literature, in this case by 132 references listed at the end of the article. Although written primarily for scientists, most of this article can be understood without formal scientific training. This article was submitted to many scientists for comments and suggestions before it was finalized and submitted for publication. It then underwent ordinary peer review by the publishing journal. The United Nations IPCC also publishes a research review in the form of a voluminous, occasionally-updated report on the subject of climate change, which the United Nations asserts is “authored” by approximately 600 scientists. These “authors” are not, however – as is ordinarily the custom in science – permitted power of approval the published review of which they are putative authors. They are permitted to comment on the draft text, but the final text neither conforms to nor includes many of their comments. The final text conforms instead to the United Nations objective of building support for world taxation and rationing of industrially-useful energy.
Purpose of Petition The purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of “settled science” and an overwhelming “consensus” in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climatological damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis. Publicists at the United Nations, Mr. Al Gore, and their supporters frequently claim that only a few “skeptics” remain – skeptics who are still unconvinced about the existence of a catastrophic human-caused global warming emergency. It is evident that 31,487 Americans with university degrees in science – including 9,029 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,487 American scientists are not “skeptics.” These scientists are instead convinced that the human-caused global warming hypothesis is without scientific validity and that government action on the basis of this hypothesis would unnecessarily and counterproductively damage both human prosperity and the natural environment of the Earth. http://www.petitionproject.org/purpose_of_petition.php
Nearly 70% of the US population is over the age of 25. More than a third of those have college degrees, with the split between STEM and nonSTEM being about 50-50, I believe. With 327M people, that means there are somewhere around 35 million Americans with STEM degrees. That means you found something like one tenth of 1%. I doubt anyone checked these people's credentials. And, you did not qualify the selection to indicate those who have degrees related to climatology and have worked in that field. On top of that, these people were given the anti-climate change argument with no rebuttal. Pluse as per the above, most would not have the qualifications or experience to derive the pro-climate argument OR to find the problems with the material they were given. In other words, this is TOTAL political BS.
The nice thing about your argument is it is doubled back around on you and your own arguments prove a wonderful reason to believe the skeptics. What??????? OKAY your reasoning against the skeptics is excellent fodder against the alarmists. Same reasons works on them too.
You aren't presenting skepticism. You are presenting a push poll, which is a political tactic. In fact, your push poll targets those who have no claim to expertise in climatology, yet you present it as an appeal to authority! You've made up your mind and are presenting thread after thread oriented to using hand picked and unquestioned sources that back your position. You have no claim to skepticism.
She should command a loyal following among ideologues desperate for legitimacy, but not the majority of folks folks amenable to science, because her aberrant notions have been so thoroughly debunked: https://skepticalscience.com/Judith_Curry_blog.htm Meanwhile, science is, inevitably, gaining the popular acceptance in the US it is accorded globally: (No information on how many buy the Trump explanation that it is a Chinese hoax.)
You have claims as an insulter though. You pretend she is not a very reliable and respected scientist. When she bought the theory you give away for free, she was well respected by your team. But she decided to question the so called science. And her site leads you to hundreds of those sites.
