Stormy Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 The British public are becoming more sceptical: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8500443.stm Presumably the ridiculous alarmist claims along with the disgusting loss of 1700 jobs at Corus (thanks to Carbon Trading) has started to awaken the general public to this nonsense Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 Evidence can be found here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/empirical-evidence-for-global-warming.htm But the burden of proof is not upon me. It is not me that is the one making the argument that the views of the majority of experts in the field is in error. Accepting the view of the majority of experts is the rational position to adopt without even needing to understand the science. In 1600 Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake partly for his views that the earth was not the centre of the universe. The consensus of the experts was the opposite. Maybe if the pro-AGW climate scientists would be doing the same to sceptics today if they could get away with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 The British public are becoming more sceptical: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8500443.stm Presumably the ridiculous alarmist claims along with the disgusting loss of 1700 jobs at Corus (thanks to Carbon Trading) has started to awaken the general public to this nonsense Is it any wonder when the news reporting on the subject has been so poor, as has been amply evidenced by the articles contributed to this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 In 1600 Giordano Bruno was burned at the stake partly for his views that the earth was not the centre of the universe. The consensus of the experts was the opposite. Maybe if the pro-AGW climate scientists would be doing the same to sceptics today if they could get away with it. If the pro-AGW scientists wanted to persecute sceptics there would be some evidence of that in their private correspondence. Instead all that has been revealed is that they shared and discussed the issues in order to refute them scientifically. Incidentally, Giordano Bruno was executed for his religious beliefs not heliocentrism. Heliocentrism did have a slightly turbulent time with the Roman Catholic Church, but it is often exaggerated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted February 5, 2010 Share Posted February 5, 2010 If the pro-AGW scientists wanted to persecute sceptics there would be some evidence of that in their private correspondence Rather a unique viewpoint. And rather blinkered. Go on, give us a link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Rather a unique viewpoint. And rather blinkered. Go on, give us a link. Not unique at all. Here is some evidence of a fraud exposed in the emails, the Douglass et al.: http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2009/11/22/smoking-guns-in-the-clr-stolen-e-mails-a-real-tale-of-real-ethics-in-science/ You could watch these too: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildcat Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Poor Watts he has sunk so low he is now complaining being a scientist disqualifies you from having an opinion on climate change....... http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2010/01/31/wattsupgate-denialists-claim-all-knowledge-is-wrong/ if his blog was honest people would be able to point out the utter stupidity of the article in the comments, but then he wouldn't do that. It is not like he is interested in the truth of honest debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LibertyBell Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Why is this thread still called no evidence for global warming when there clearly is lots of evidence and the debate is being won by the scientific arguments over the youtube conspiracy loons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Heliocentrism did have a slightly turbulent time with the Roman Catholic Church. Priceless. And this.... The peer review process as can be seen from the published comments did ask for a reference for the glaciers claim and in response a reference to the WWF was provided. OK then. Jacksrake: Global Warming will make statues come to life. They will take over the planet. Wildcat: Hmm, sounds fishy .. do you have a link for that? Jacksrake: Here y'are. http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/science-%26-technology/global-warming-will-make-statues-come-to-life%2c-say-experts-2007041668/ Wildcat: Blimey, you're right. Quick, get it in the IPCC report! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 6, 2010 Share Posted February 6, 2010 Why is this thread still called no evidence for global warming when there clearly is lots of evidence Good point. the debate is being won by the scientific arguments Which debate ... the fact that the climate is changing or the fact that humans are causing it? the youtube conspiracy loons? Ah ... anyone who doesn't hold your viewpoint is a loon. And it was going so well...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now