Am I still allowed to question climate change?

[Wildcat]

As show by this thread you cannot argue with a global warming apostle.

 

They will not accept anything that is contrary to their point of view.

 

Just be humble in the knowledge when in 10-20 years when the next end of the world story breaks that you where right about global warming and the likes of Wildcat are now dressing in their pyjamas, wearing monster feet slippers and arguing with a letterbox somewhere in east Croydon.

 

I would love for there to be no global warming. No one on this thread has yet been able to provide any evidence from a credible source that it isn't.

[Wildcat]

No there hasn't.

 

not a single link on there is from 1998 to 2010.

 

There were plenty of links.

 

This one for example:

http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/01/13/models-2/

[Berberis]

I would love for there to be no global warming. No one on this thread has yet been able to provide any evidence from a credible source that it isn't.

 

Everyone who proclaims there is such a thing as global warming you consider credible while everything else you disregard as none credible. Credibility is down to one’s personal judgement it is not something physical you can measure. Therefore you choose to see what you want to see.

[Wildcat]

Everyone who proclaims there is such a thing as global warming you consider credible while everything else you disregard as none credible. Credibility is down to one’s personal judgement it is not something physical you can measure. Therefore you choose to see what you want to see.

 

Credibilty can be measured by number of peer reviewed papers published, or consistent accurate reporting of them.

[Wildcat]

This video makes some good points, it concludes:

 

The anti-science movement is desperate and angry. The basic science of climate change seems bullet proof – and it just keeps coming. Each new study seems to show even greater cause for concern.

 

Scientific American editorialized on the escalating ugliness of climate denier tactics and rhetoric, noting that stolen emails and minor errors have done nothing to undermine the science. The editors wondered if “we are a people increasingly estranged from critical thinking, divorced from logic, alienated from even objective truth.”

 

As if to underline that point, the South Dakota Legislature recently passed a resolution urging schools not to teach the science of climate change. The document stated that, there are a variety of climatological, meteorological, astrological, thermological, and other forces that influence climate.

 

Thermology of course, is a discipline unrelated to climate science. And to say there’s no difference between climate denialism and astrology does a great disservice to astrologers. What’s revealing is that climate deniers don’t know there is a difference. So the technique is to throw out as many baseless accusations out as possible, in the hope that some of the mud will stick.

 

The Anti-science movement’s fascination with the 12th century goes way beyond just the temperature of the medieval period. There’s a longing for a return to those values as well.

 

(Glenn Beck) “There’s not enough knives, this…if the IPCC had been done by Japanese scientists, there’s not enough knives on planet Earth for hari kari that should have occurred.”

 

(Rush Limbaugh) “Making sure that every scientist at every university in this country that’s been involved in this is named, and fired, drawn and quartered, or whatever it is.”

 

Not to be outdone, climate denier Mark Morano called for public floggings of scientists.

 

What makes a great civilization turn away from science, reason, and civility, to hatred of knowledge, ignorance, fear, and brutality? We seem to be running an experiment to find out.

 

http://climatecrocks.com/2010/03/15/flogging-the-scientists/#more-203

[Wildcat]

I wouldn't worry about that,the head of the IPCC is a railway engineer..

 

And do you know why he is chair of the IPCC?

 

Bush administration forces out IPCC chair Robert Watson

The same memo which recommended Harlan Watson contained a direct request: ‘Can [iPCC Chair Dr Robert] Watson be replaced now at the request of the US?’

It launched a successful effort to oust then IPCC Chair Dr Robert Watson. Watson, an atmospheric scientist, had been at the forefront of the climate issue for over 20 years, coordinating international reaction to the ozone hole crisis, then global warming. He had served as Chair of the IPCC between 1996-2002.

In April 2002, the Bush Administration opposed Watson’s re-appointment, instead successfully backing IPCC vice-chairman Rajendra Pachauri, to replace him.

Robert Watson himself commented, ‘So those who say I'm an advocate don't want to hear the message that indeed the earth is warming; that most of the warming of the last 50 years is attributable to human activities; that carbon dioxide is the key human-induced greenhouse gas and that most of it comes from fossil fuels. There are some people who clearly don't want to hear that message, but that is the message of the IPCC…’212

Fred Singer made an oblique reference to Watson’s demise after the AR4 was published, saying ‘Compared to earlier reports, the Fourth Assessment is really quite sober, perhaps because a real scientist less given to ideology heads the effort.’213

 

http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/dealing-in-doubt.pdf

 

A denialist Bush Administration that was taking advice from ExxonMobile that for 20 years (and continuing) has been poisoning the debate with its funding put him there.

 

For example of the 19 sponsors of the 2008 Heartlands Institute Climate denial conference, only five were not Exxon-funded front groups or conservative think tanks running denial campaigns.

[GordonBennet]

It's interesting isn't it how the pro global warming lobby are quite happy to accept without question the opinions of any scientist who agrees with their blinkered views yet when experts produce evidence that probes global warming isn't happened they get disgracefully smeared with lurid and unfounded allegations of corruption and bribery.

 

If you can't argue with the facts then making up lies about the expert providing them just shows up how weak your argument is. The likes of Wildcat should be ashamed.

[JIbbo]

And do you know why he is chair of the IPCC?

 

 

 

http://www.greenpeace.org/raw/content/international/press/reports/dealing-in-doubt.pdf

 

A denialist Bush Administration that was taking advice from ExxonMobile that for 20 years (and continuing) has been poisoning the debate with its funding put him there.

 

For example of the 19 sponsors of the 2008 Heartlands Institute Climate denial conference, only five were not Exxon-funded front groups or conservative think tanks running denial campaigns.

 

The sea ice extent has finally matched the highest level shown for the last 9 years (corrected for day of year).

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

 

If the earths warming shouldn't the ice be melting not increasing ?

[truman]

Just a little, he fabricates evidence.

 

 

A bit like the CRU at East Anglia then? Oh no,sorry,they lose it don't they..?

[Wildcat]

The sea ice extent has finally matched the highest level shown for the last 9 years (corrected for day of year).

 

http://www.ijis.iarc.uaf.edu/en/home/seaice_extent.htm

 

If the earths warming shouldn't the ice be melting not increasing ?

 

In short the Arctic Oscillation that brought exceptionally cold weather this winter.

 

The Arctic Sea remains significantly lower than it was in the period 1979-2000. See Fig 3 on this page to sea the long term trend.

 

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/