ken, Ken, Ken...

Do you really have to resort to cranks and hacks to support your discredited thesis?

Here's some research for you to do:

1. Look into the "Urban Renaissance Institute" and the "Consumer Policy Institute" which are "divisions" of the "Energy Probe Research Foundation," and see what you turn up.

2. Look up "Apology to Dr. Nigel Weiss"--one of Solomon's "Deniers."

3. Look up another one of Solomon's deniers--Dr. Shaviv. He, too, claims Solomon never interviewed him, never spoke to him, and alos misrepresented his views.

In fact, none of Solomon's (who is neither a scientist nor climatologist) denies global warming is real, is problematic and caused by human activities.

This is getting fun, Ken.

A petition organized by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine between 1999 and 2001 claimed some 17,800 scientists in opposition to the Kyoto Protocol.

You must be the last person on earth who puts any stock into the OISM petition.

Glad you are having fun Jadegold!

We here at WILLisms.com are all about fun.

Lying whore Solomon refers to a 1991 Gallup poll that is supposed to have found that only a few scientists think there is man-made global warming.

Here is the TRUTH:

Associated Press
December 8, 1997, Monday, BC cycle
SECTION: Washington Dateline
HEADLINE: WASHINGTON TODAY: Global warming debate generates much heat
BYLINE: By DONALD M. ROTHBERG, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: WASHINGTON

One conservative group criticized the news media for accepting claims that there is widespread scientific agreement on global warming. The Media Research Center cited "a recent Gallup poll" that said only 19 percent of the members of the American Meteorological Society and the American Geophysical Union think that a warmer climate has been the result of greenhouse gas emissions.

The Gallup organization said the poll was taken in October of 1991. It noted that some people, opposed to claims that human-induced global warming is occurring, "have used the study to support their position."

"These writers have taken survey results out of context that appear to show scientists do not believe that human-induced global warming is occurring."

The statement from Gallup noted that when asked if they thought human-induced global warming was occurring, 66 percent of the scientists surveyed said yes.

66%

Yeah, some concensus there.

KEN,

The poll was done in 1991. Since then, the evidence for man-made global warming has increased.

Ah, I see.

So . . . what is the consensus percentage up to now, then?

70%?

80%?

99.5%?

If the percentage was 99% perhaps Jadegold would be correct, and his analogy to creationism might then be appropriate.

The percentage just simply is not that high, and there are far too many well-respected scientists (as opposed to IPCC 'reviewers') who are skeptical to say that there is some kind of definite consensus and that the debate is over.

What is it that you guys fear so much about scientists actually involved in climatology who doubt Al Gore's dogma? If you were truly scientific about things, you would open your ears to that rather than working busily trying to shove it down the memory hole, like some Pravda-like editorial board.

Lemme guess, you guys are hoping Al Gore is going to jump into the presidential race. Or you want us all to ride bicycles instead of driving cars. Or you just want the liberal view of things to prevail over the conservative view of things, consequences be damned.

Ken:

The fact remains you trotted out a discredited hack whose "deniers" don't even deny global warming. A hack who lies and uses a discredited petition. Ahack whose publications are forced to issue apologies and corrections.

Another fact: there is no scintific organization in the field that denies global warming. In addition to the IPCC, the EPA, NOAA, The American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) have all enorsed thee fact global warming is real and a
problem.

I'd be very confident in stating there are probably more scientists who believe in creationism than those who don't believe in global warming.

Jadegold, you would be wrong.

Sure, trot out all the AABB CCDD EEFF organizations you like, the fact is, there are a lot of scientists who disagree with your position, and you seem very threatened by that.

I am just wondering why that is.

the fact is, there are a lot of scientists who disagree with your position

How many? Where? Is it more than 1? More than 10?

Names, Ken, names.

Look, global warming is a scientific fact. It is disputed by almost no one in the scientific community.

You can trot out some more folks--like Solomon--who have been discredite and I'll keep whackin' over the fence.

Okay, let's say I come up with 20, 30, 40 names.

What does it matter?

You have bought into the orthodoxy that man has such knowledge - bordering on the omniscient - that we can predict what the climate will be like 20 or 30 years from now.

Never mind that they can't even predict the weather for next weekend, you are convinced that they are infallible.

They can't even agree on how many tons of carbon dioxide is being pumped out by man every year - yet, never mind, they have it all figured out somehow.

Because, what's to figure out? The IPCC, for example, has already preordained the outcome.

Actually I'm a published scientist, having published several articles in peer reviewed journals (Carbon and Langmuir to be specific).

I disagree with Al Gore's position on global warming. In fact, I believe that while the Earth is indeed warming, it is not nor has it ever been anthropogenic.

Global warming is a scientific fact in the same way that global cooling is. Both occur.

Anthropogenic or Anthropomorphic global climate change? Eh.

**The statement from Gallup noted that when asked if they thought human-induced global warming was occurring, 66 percent of the scientists surveyed said yes.**

That may be. But now ask them what portion of the warming is caused by humans. If one tenth of one percent is caused by humans, then the answer is "yes." Is it significant? THAT answer is no. It's all in the question.