Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

2/3 of scientists disbelieve AGW

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
guardian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 10:57 PM
Original message
2/3 of scientists disbelieve AGW
http://www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=10fe77b0-802a-23ad-4df1-fc38ed4f85e3


The explosion of skeptical scientific voices is accelerating unabated in 2009... rejecting man-made climate fears prompted by the UN IPCC.

Prominent Japanese Geologist Dr. Shigenori Maruyama, a professor at the Tokyo Institute of Technology’s Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences who has authored more than 125 scientific publications, said in March 2009 that “there was widespread skepticism among his colleagues about the IPCC's fourth and latest assessment report that most of the observed global temperature increase since the mid-20th century ‘is very likely due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.” Maruyama noted that when this question was raised at a Japan Geoscience Union symposium last year, ‘the result showed 90 per cent of the participants do not believe the IPCC report.”

The rise in skeptical scientists are responding not only to an increase in dire “predictions” of climate change, but also a steady stream of peer-reviewed studies, analyses, real world data, and inconvenient developments have further cast doubts on the claims of man-made global warming fear activists. The latest peer-reviewed study in Geophysical Research Letters is being touted as a development that “could turn the climate change world upside down.”

The study finds that the “Earth is undergoing natural climate shift.”



Tsonis further added: “The temperature has flattened and is actually going down. We are seeing a new shift towards cooler temperatures that will last for probably about three decades.”

Climate ‘primarily being driven by natural forcing mechanisms’

Climatologist and Paloeclimate researcher Dr. Diane Douglas, who has authored or edited over 200 technical reports, also declared natural factors are dominating climate, not CO2. “The recent ‘panic’ to control GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions and billions of dollars being dedicated for the task has me deeply concerned that US, and other countries are spending precious global funds to stop global warming, when it is primarily being driven by natural forcing mechanisms,” Douglas, who is releasing a major new paper she authored that will be presented at a UNESCO conference in Ghent, Belgium on March 20, 2009, told the minority staff on the Environment and Public Works Committee on March 10, 2009.

Retired Award Winning NASA Atmospheric Scientist Dr. William W. Vaughan, recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Medal, a former Division Chief of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center and author of more than 100 refereed journal articles, monographs, and papers, also now points to natural causes of recent climate changes. “The cause of these global changes is fundamentally due to the Sun and its effect on the Earth as it moves about in its orbit. Not from man-made activities,” Vaughan told the minority staff on the Environment and Public Works Committee on February 6, 2009.

Geology Professor Uberto Crescenti of the University G.d'Annunzio in Italy, the past president of the Society of Italian Geologists also agrees that nature, not mankind is ruling the climate. “I think that climatic changes have natural causes according to geological data…I am very glad to sign the U.S. Senate’s report of scientists against the theory of man-made global warming,” Crescenti told the minority staff on the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 15, 2009.

UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Steven M. Japar, a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions, challenged the IPCC’s climate claims.

“Temperature measurements show that the hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them!” Japar told the minority staff on the Environment and Public Works Committee on January 7, 2009.

Mathematical Physicist Dr. Frank Tipler, professor at Tulane University who has authored 58 peer-reviewed publications and five books, ridiculed man-made climate claims. “Whether the ice caps melt, or expand --- whatever happens --- the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) theorists claim it confirms their theory. A perfect example of a pseudo-science like astrology," Tipler wrote on December 22, 2008.

Botanist Dr. David Bellamy, a famed UK environmental campaigner, former lecturer at Durham University, and host of a popular UK TV series on wildlife, says the international promotion of man-made global warming fears are nearing their end. (Note: Bellamy was in the original 2007 U.S. Senate report.] “The ­science has, quite simply, gone awry. In fact, it’s not even science any more, it’s anti-science,” Bellamy, who used to believe in man-made warming, declared on November 5, 2008.

‘Journalistic malpractice’

Chemist Dr. Mark L. Campbell, a professor of chemistry at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD, who has published numerous studies in the Journal of the American Chemical Society on topics such as methane, squarely blames the media for promoting unfounded climate fears. “The sky is not burning, and to claim that it is amounts to journalistic malpractice…the press only promotes the global warming alarmists and ignores or minimizes those of us who are skeptical,” Chapman wrote on January 13, 2009.

“Scientists across the globe are catching on -- global warming is not real science. There is a sucker born every minute who believes in it, and Al Gore is playing the role of P.T. Barnum,” Chemist Max S. Strozier declared on December 22, 2009 in an email to the minority staff of the Environment and Public Works Committee. Strozier spent 26 years specializing in chemical laboratory analysis, served as a U.S. Department of Defense aerospace chemist and is a former lecturer at San Jose State University and the University of Texas.

Highlights of the Updated 2009 Senate Minority Report of 700 plus scientists featuring the 59 additional scientists:

Full Text of the 59 additional scientists’ remarks begins on page 70 of report:

The new scientific report “directly challenges the conclusions of the IPCC Summary that human emissions of carbon dioxide are causing dangerous and unprecedented warming.” - Quantitative Economist Kenneth A. Haapala, the past president of the prestigious Philosophical Society of Washington, the oldest scientific society in Washington (founded 1871), has reviewed hundreds of reports based on quantitative techniques. Haapala co-authored the report “Nature, Not Human Activity, Rules the Climate”

“I think that climatic changes have a natural causes according many geological data…I am very glad to sign the U.S. Senate’s report of scientists against the theory of man-made global warming.” - Geology Professor Uberto Crescenti of the University G.d'Annunzio in Italy is the past president of the Society of Italian Geologists.

“I am appalled at the state of discord in the field of climate science…There is no observational evidence that the addition of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions have caused any temperature perturbations in the atmosphere.” - Award-winning atmospheric scientist Dr. George T. Wolff, former member of the EPA’s Science Advisory Board, served on a committee of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) and authored more than 90 peer-reviewed studies.

“The sky is not burning, and to claim that it is amounts to journalistic malpractice…the press only promotes the global warming alarmists and ignores or minimizes those of us who are skeptical.” - Chemist Dr. Mark L. Campbell, a professor of chemistry at the U.S. Naval Academy in Annapolis, MD, who has published numerous studies in the Journal of the American Chemical Society on topics such as methane.

“Once again we have misleading climate change pronouncements being based on data errors, data errors detected by non-UN, non-IPCC, non-peer-reviewed external observers…This is exactly what happens when you base your arguments on ‘consensus science’ and not scientific fact.” - Professor Dr. Doug L. Hoffman, a mathematician, computer programmer, and engineer, who worked on environmental models and conducted research in molecular dynamics simulations. Hoffman co-authored the 2009 book, The Resilient Earth, described as “bringing a dose of skeptical reality to climate science and the global warming debate.”

“The questions are scientific, but the UN answers are political. The global warming debate is hardly about science.” - Computer Modeler and Engineer Allen Simmons, who worked 12 years with NASA's top climate scientists and wrote computer systems software for the world's first weather satellites and aided in the development of computer systems for polar orbiting satellites. Simmons co-authored the new skeptical book The Resilient Earth.

Belief in climate models compared to “ancient astrology”… "I believe the anthropogenic (man-made) effect for climate change is still only one of the hypotheses to explain the variability of climate.” - Award-winning Japanese Physicist Dr. Kanya Kusano, program director of the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology who’s research “focuses on the immaturity of simulation work cited in support of the theory of anthropogenic climate change.” compared climate models to “ancient astrology.”

“The recent ‘panic’ to control GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions and billions of dollars being dedicated for the task has me deeply concerned that US, and other countries are spending precious global funds to stop global warming, when it is primarily being driven by natural forcing mechanisms.” - Climatologist and Paloeclimate researcher Dr. Diane Douglas, who has authored or edited over 200 technical reports, specialized in the reconstruction of a variety of proxy data and has worked for the Department of Energy and conducted research for the Arizona State Office of Climatology to investigate the Little Ice Age.

“Temperature measurements show that the hot zone is non-existent. This is more than sufficient to invalidate global climate models and projections made with them!”- UN IPCC Scientist Dr. Steven M. Japar, a PhD atmospheric chemist who was part of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) Second (1995) and Third (2001) Assessment Reports, and has authored 83 peer-reviewed publications and in the areas of climate change, atmospheric chemistry, air pollutions and vehicle emissions.

“The cause of these global changes is fundamentally due to the Sun and its effect on the Earth as it moves about in its orbit. Not from man-made activities.” - Retired Award Winning NASA Atmospheric Scientist Dr. William W. Vaughan, recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Medal, a former Division Chief of NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center and author more than 100 refereed journal articles, monographs, and papers.

“Unfortunately, Climate Science has become Political Science…It is tragic that some perhaps well-meaning but politically motivated scientists who should know better have whipped up a global frenzy about a phenomena which is statistically questionable at best.” - Award-Winning Princeton University Physicist Dr. Robert H. Austin, who has published 170 scientific papers, was elected a member of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and is the current Chair of the U.S. Liaison Committee of the International Union of Pure and Applied Physics. Austin, who won the 2005 Edgar Lilienfeld Prize of the American Physical Society

“If global cooling will come soon -- scientists will lose trust .” - Award-winning Japanese Geologist Dr. Shigenori Maruyama, a professor at the Tokyo Institute of Technology’s Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences who has authored more than 125 scientific publications, was decorated with the Medal of Honor with Purple Ribbon for a major contribution in the field of geology, specializes in the geological evidence of prehistoric climate change.

“Observe which side resorts to the most vociferous name-calling and you are likely to have identified the side with the weaker argument and they know it.” - Materials and Research Physicist Dr. Charles R. Anderson, a former Department of Navy research physicist who has published more than 25 scientific papers specializes in spectroscopy, microscopy, thermal analysis, mass spectroscopy, and surface chemistry.

“The data which is used to date for making the conclusions and predictions on global warming are so rough and primitive, compared to what’s needed, and so unreliable that they are not even worth mentioning by respectful scientists.” - Award-winning Aerospace and Mechanical Engineer Dr. Gregory W. Moore, who has authored or co-authored more than 75 publications, book chapters, and reports, and authored the 2001 Version of the NASA Space Science Technology Plan which included a comprehensive approach to studying the Sun-Earth connection aspect of space-based research.

“I appreciate the opportunity to add my name to those who disagree that global warming is man-made…Hansen embarrassed NASA by coming out with his claims of global warming.” - Retired senior NASA atmospheric scientist Dr. John S. Theon, a former supervisor of NASA’s James Hansen, and the former Chief of the Climate Processes Research Program at NASA Headquarters and former Chief of the Atmospheric Dynamics & Radiation Branch.

“I am pleased to be considered a ‘denier’ in this cause if this puts me in the class with those who defied prevailing ‘scientific consensus’ that the earth was flat and that the earth was the not the center of the universe.” – Retired U.S. Air Force (USAF) Meteorologist William “Bill” Lyons, of the USAF’s Global Weather Central at Strategic Air Command.

“I do not find the supposed scientific consensus among my colleagues… Curiously, it is a feature of man-made global warming that every fact confirms it: rising temperatures or decreasing temperatures. No matter what the weather, some model of global warming offers a watertight explanation.” - Earth Scientist Dr. Javier Cuadros of the UK Natural History Museum, who specializes in Clay Mineralogy and has published more than 30 scientific papers

“It is amazing to me, as a professional geologist, how many otherwise intelligent people have, as some may say, ‘drunk the Al Gore Kool-Aid’ concerning global climate change.” - Professional Geologist Earl F. Titcomb Jr. has co-authored analyses of geological and seismological hazards.

“Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus is the business of politics. . . . What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.’” - Atmospheric Scientist Timothy R. Minnich, who has more than 30 years experience in the design and management of a wide range of air quality investigations for industry and government, is a past member of the American Meteorological Society and specializes in issues like acid rain and ozone, and has authored or co-authored numerous technical publications and reports.

“Based on the laws of physics, the effect on temperature of man’s contribution to atmospheric CO2 levels is minuscule and indiscernible from the natural variability caused in large part by changes in solar energy output.” - Atmospheric Scientist Robert L. Scotto, who has more than 30 years air quality consulting experience, served as a manager for an EPA Superfund contract and is co-founder of Minnich and Scotto, Inc., a full-service air quality consulting firm. He also is a past member of the American Meteorological Society (AMS). Scotto, a meteorologist who has authored or co-authored numerous technical publications and reports.

“Whether the ice caps melt, or expand --- whatever happens --- the AGW (anthropogenic global warming) theorists claim it confirms their theory. A perfect example of a pseudo-science like astrology.” - Mathematical Physicist Dr. Frank Tipler, professor at Tulane University has authored 58 peer-reviewed publications and five books.

“My dear colleague Hansen, I believe, has finally gone off the deep end... The global warming ‘time bomb,’ ‘disastrous climate changes that spiral dynamically out of humanity's control.’ These are the words of an apocalyptic prophet, not a rational scientist.” - Chemist Dr. Nicholas Drapela of the faculty of Oregon State University Chemistry Department

“There is no credible evidence of the current exceptional global warming trumpeted by the IPCC…The IPCC is no longer behaving as an investigative scientific organization or pretending to be one…Their leaders betrayed the trust of the world community.” - Chemist Dr. Grant Miles, author of numerous scientific publications who was elected to a Fellowship of the Royal Institute of Chemistry, was a member of UK Atomic Energy Authority Chemical Separation Plant Committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. a US Senate Minority Report? hmmm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Teaser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:02 PM
Response to Original message
2. Why is this nonsense being posted here?
I suppose I should alert on this.
You can't post bullshit and pass it off as news.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
provis99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:06 PM
Response to Original message
3. the problem is this
The man-made global warming is IN ADDITION to natural environmental changes. ie. we're making the problem WORSE. I find it odd that not one of the scientists cited is actually an expert on climate change. Come on, chemists? Mathematicians? Navy physicists? Mechanical engineers? What a bunch of right-wing buffoons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blecht Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
4. This is Democratic Underground
Not a dumping ground for trash articles spewing Republican talking points.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:09 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Um, have ya been to the Guns forum lately?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. reducing pollution/switching to energy alternatives are good on their OWN merits in any case nt
Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 11:13 PM by msongs
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:14 PM
Response to Original message
7. AGW is real
Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 11:16 PM by mix
you don't think human activity has anything to do with climate change? check out this graph, the sharp increase coincides with the industrial revolution and the rise of modern capitalism (and the start of our addiction to fossil fuels)

Remember: it took 12,000 years to get to 1 billion and merely 209 to get to 6.7 billion...we humans are destroying our habitat

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Believing Is Art Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. Oh, where to start
Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 11:51 PM by Believing Is Art
The John S. Theon guy has been debunked before. He was never Hansen's boss, he just claimed it to give himself legitimacy. He left NASA in 1994 and references extremely outdated models.

"Award-winning Aerospace and Mechanical Engineer Dr. Gregory W. Moore, who has authored or co-authored more than 75 publications, book chapters, and reports, and authored the 2001 Version of the NASA Space Science Technology Plan which included a comprehensive approach to studying the Sun-Earth connection aspect of space-based research."
As an aerospace engineer, I can honestly say I never learned jack shit about climate science from my courses. Climate science has nothing to do with aerospace engineering. "Sun-Earth connection aspect of space-based research" could be anything from orbital science to cosmic radiation's effect on space vehicle materials. The listed credentials give him as much authority as the clerk down at the AM/PM.

Frank Tipler - This guy is nuts. He tries to use science to prove immortality and all of the miracles in the New Testament are possible. He might be brilliant, I don't know, but he's off his rocker.

Dr. Grant Miles - Are those actually his qualifications? He appears to be a business guy, not a scientist.

I'd spend more time on this, but it gets tedious.

Oh, what the hell.

William W. Vaughan - Just looked through his NASA TR's. His work on climate only related to the design of space vehicles and its effect on launches. Oh, and a couple on developing a standard atmosphere model. Hell, I made a standard atmosphere model for Mars based on data from satellites, am I a Martian climate expert now?

Dr. Diane Douglas - The only info I could find on her was related to her opposition to AGW. That raises some questions. Most scientific articles at least have an online abstract.

Steven M. Japar - Conflicts of interest.

David Bellamy - Wow, I actually feel kind of sorry for this guy. He did a 180 on his global warming views after reading an article that referenced data that was simply made up out of thin air. He subsequently was ostracized - understandably. After finding out he'd been had, he drew out of the debate altogether, but his treatment from the AGW crowd has left the poor old man feeling pretty bitter, apparently. Now he's being used by the deniers.

Okay, this really is getting tedious and I think I've made my point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gregorian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
9. They'd have to be blind. It's kind of hard to argue with the evidence.
Edited on Thu Apr-09-09 11:27 PM by Gregorian
We're seeing carbon dioxide concentrations, in ice core samples, that haven't been seen in half a million years.

There is another component to global warming that is actually decreasing it's effects. Taken out of context those can be seen as counter to global warming. But in context, they make a case for global warming even stronger.

No one knows where this is heading. There is no excuse for not being conservative, and not assuming the worse. Anything less is reckless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugabear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:28 PM
Response to Original message
10. These scientists are environmental criminals
By putting out bullshit science that they KNOW is false, these scientists are culpable for helping to convince governments to delay or refuse to take action to combat AGW.

Now please take this bullshit over to your teabagging friends.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stuntcat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:44 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. exactly
The biggest reason these types can't accept the truth is because they KNOW deep inside that their argument is against everything that LIVES on this planet. If they accept the science then they'll also have to admit that their arguing against the protection of the actual physical Earth was a big part of why we didn't save ourselves.

Mark my word- the North Pole will be gone, Florida will be flooded, thousands more species of life will be wiped out, humans will go to war over water and maybe fresh air.. .but these same people will have to repeat the same things over and over.


The only good it does here is showing us an example of the best they can do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 12:55 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. thermohaline circulation might collapse too n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hugabear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:30 PM
Response to Original message
11. Who rec'd this bullshit thread?
How many freeper assholes are out there lurking?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NavyDavy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
12. pure untrue bs.....should be ashamed to have posted that here!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-09-09 11:56 PM
Response to Original message
15. Republican propaganda?
No thanks! That crap has been de-bunked over and over. :wtf:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Birthmark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 02:22 AM
Response to Original message
17. Thanks for posting this.
It should provide me with a handy list of idiots in the future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghonadz Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 03:56 AM
Response to Original message
18. Denier cult drivel versus actual facts about the consensus
The opening post is just more denier cult drivel from the Marc Morano propaganda mill.

Meanwhile, in the real world, here's something that reflects the reality of the consensus a bit more accurately.


Scientists Agree Human-induced Global Warming Is Real, Survey Says

"In analyzing responses by sub-groups, Doran found that climatologists who are active in research showed the strongest consensus on the causes of global warming, with 97 percent agreeing humans play a role."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Systematic Chaos Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 11:35 PM
Response to Reply #18
25. Please allow me to welcome you to DU, Mr. - um - Ghonadz!
:wave:

Good first post, and I'm going to chuckle every time I see your screen name floating around here. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Viking12 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
19. Don't go away mad, just go away.
EOS, TRANSACTIONS AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION, VOL. 90, NO. 3, doi:10.1029/2009EO030002, 2009

Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change

Peter T. Doran


Maggie Kendall Zimmerman


Abstract

Fifty-two percent of Americans think most climate scientists agree that the Earth has been warming in recent years, and 47% think climate scientists agree (i.e., that there is a scientific consensus) that human activities are a major cause of that warming, according to recent polling (see http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm). However, attempts to quantify the scientific consensus on anthropogenic warming have met with criticism. For instance, Oreskes <2004> reviewed 928 abstracts from peer-reviewed research papers and found that more than 75% either explicitly or implicitly accepted the consensus view that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities. Yet Oreskes's approach has been criticized for overstating the level of consensus acceptance within the examined abstracts and for not capturing the full diversity of scientific opinion . A review of previous attempts at quantifying the consensus and criticisms is provided by Kendall Zimmerman <2008>. The objective of our study presented here is to assess the scientific consensus on climate change through an unbiased survey of a large and broad group of Earth scientists.

http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2009/2009EO030002.shtml

See also:

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_final.pdf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 05:14 PM
Response to Original message
20. What ignorant fucking horseshit
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
21. Oh, look! A drive-by shit-fling!
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #21
22. With a nifty acronym, too
Kind of like in the pharmaceutical TV ads....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. "Ask your doctor if AGW Denial is right for you!"
Maybe then you could have footage of a guy trying to throw a phrenology skull over a blazing pyre of AEI & Cato position papers . . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-10-09 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. If you experience AGW denial for more than four hours, see your doctor immediately
:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dead_Parrot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-11-09 03:46 AM
Response to Original message
26. How the fuck is 700 scientists "2/3"?
Edited on Sat Apr-11-09 04:04 AM by Dead_Parrot
OK, I shouldn't be expecting too much by way of accurate math here, but are there really only 1,050 scientists on Earth?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC