Please provide ten names on that list and explain when they signed it and how they have credibility worth paying attention to. Hint: you can't.
If you are interested in the Oregon Petition and Frederick Seitz then you might choose to learn. Seitz was the guy who who spend much of his life trying to prove that cigarettes are safe. The Oregon Institute is a foundation that believes nuclear war is not so bad. At the time of the Oregon Petition the Institute was pushing home schooling based on the Encyclopedia Britannica from 1913.
This is an interesting and entertaining video. Worth watching.
http://climatecrocks.com/tag/dr-frederic...
You really should educate yourself about the petition, Seitz, the institute and especially the National Academy of Science.
Because every one of those "31,000" are hired guns working for the fossil fuel industry, or only scientists in the same way nutritionists are doctors. There are over a million American climate scientists who agree that humans are the cause of of the accelerated pace of the current warming cycle.
It amazes me that anyone thinks the "Oregon Petition" has any value. The most famous signatories (Teller and Seitz) are both dead. In fact, Teller was dead even before the PREVIOUS IPCC report came out--he clearly is not up-to-date on recent science! Of the people that signed it. very few at all are climate scientists. Many of the people that signed it have no background at all in earth science of any sort--they're veterinarians and engineers, etc.
Every major scientific society has come out with statements about the reality of AGW--the AGU, AMS, APS, RMS, ACS, etc. If you add up their membership you will have hundreds of thousands of REAL scientists, not the fake ones from the Oregon Petition.
Because the theory is being discredited more and more each day and the public is seeing it for what it is - a failure. The media, the politicians, and the AGW cultists all have way too much to lose when the theory is finally declared a failure. They have everything on the line from their own credibility to their political agendas. They've put so much into this failed theory to them it's too big to fail that they are willing to double down on the shrill nature of their alarmism just to keep it in the lime light as long as they can so the cultists and politicians can cram their new world order agenda (UN Agenda 21) and increase the power and control of governments so they can raise taxes and redistribute wealth and destroy capitalism before the theory completely loses all credibility.
Dave, the fossil fuel industry gave many, many times the amount of money to AGW cultist organizations and researchers than they ever gave to 'the denialists.' Kind of hypocritical to make such a stupid assertion like that, don't you think?
Joseph Goebbels,
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
So if you get caught in a lie, you double down and this makes you look like you were right to the uninformed. It is a time old formula.
The theory of the Big Lie was succinctly expounded by Adolf Hitler, an acknowledged master of the genre. Here is what Der Führer wrote in vol. I, Chapter 10 of Mein Kampf (in James Murphy' translation):
"...in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying."
'Expert liars' that is the right name for them.
To qualify to sign the OISM Petition Project, a person needed to be a University graduate. Having a university degree does not make a person a scientist, any more than eating donuts makes a person a police officer.
http://www.petitionproject.org/qualifica...
Jim Z
<15 years ago, there was only 3 years without warming. Now there is 18.>
From 1995-1998 for the HadCRUT4 dataset Trend: 0.330 ±1.691 °C/decade (2σ)
NOt statistically significant, little better than a coin toss.
From 1996-2014 for the HadCRUT4 dataset Trend: 0.088 ±0.110 °C/decade (2σ)
That is statistically significant.
That's a BS conservative propaganda ploy
many of those 'scientists' are christians and dentists, not climate scientists.
‘Cosmos’ Explains How Corporations Fund Science Denial
http://billmoyers.com/2014/04/22/the-lat...
interesting that you would claim 30000 is compelling and yet .. by far larger numbers support the view that AGW is a genuine concern
further I note that this "petition" has been operating for more than 15 years, there appears to be no mechanism for signatories to have their name removed should they have become aware of new and compelling information that may have changed their minds
you wouldnt suggest there hasnt been any new studies or raw data published during the last 15 years .. would you?
EDIT
Jim Z
the weight of considered scientific opinion differs from yours
silly indeed
Because the mainstream media is always promoting statism. They are Leftists, so that's what they do. The mainstream media is always on-board with every Leftist hoax and scare tactic. So naturally they are shills for the man-made Global Warming SCAM.
-----------------------
why did the fossil fuel industry create a 100 million dollar slush fund to hire deniers like you to post lies on YA ?
http://www.petitionproject.org/
I actually disbelieve that as much as I disbelieve 97% of scientists believe in global warming
A real skeptic would investigate that list. When the list includes the spice girls and dr hawkeye from tv show mash, you should really question it.
NBC has carbon credits to trade and nobody is trading.
They are worthless , Napkins have more value or paper towels.
Where do I sign up for $100,000,000 slush fund? I would only need a hundredth of it.
Jason, 15 years ago, there was only 3 years without warming. Now there is 18. Your argument is silly.
To answer your question, it has been demonstrated that nearly all journalists want to change the world, not report on it. The MSM are dominantly (like 95%) leftist. They want to promote AGW to change the world and promote their leftist agenda IMO.
Because the 31 thousand scientists lie is one of the oldest and dumbest anti-science crocs around. It has been shown to be utter rubbish dozens of times here on YA.
http://www.skepticalscience.com/OISM-Pet...
