Its really just a US thing. Just like not accepting evolutionary biology
It's scary, isn't it, when people with no training, education, or specialization in a subject somehow believe they are qualified to pass judgment on the conclusions made by the people who have that training, education, and specialization? That's what one calls 'being full of your own self importance' or 'breathtaking arrogance' or 'being full of' ... well ... something else.
I hope many of our skeptics are still around in 30 or 40 years time so they can go into schools and answer questions from the kids such as 'if you had scientists you'd trained to study the climate, and these people predicted that these problems were going to happen, why didn't you listen to them and try and do something about it'?
Ian: I'm starting a campaign against this '16 year' argument because skeptics continue to hold it up in this triumphalist fashion when, in fact, it makes their opinions look utterly stupid. Here's why:
1. If you agree that there has been no rise in temperature in 16 years, then that implies you agree there was a temperature increase before that. So what 'natural factor' has suddenly stopped producing this warming?
2. Skeptics and deniers argue that scientists are fudging the data. So who took the data that shows there was no rise in 16 years. Oopps, the scientists you guys said were lying. Only they're not. But they were. But not when we agree with something. But before that ...
3. You guys pointed out that other planets were warming. So if they're warming and the earth has stopped warming that kinda disproves the sort of 'natural factor' you were speculating about. Doh!
4. So does temperature lead or lag CO2? I mean, CO2 levels have risen and yet temperatures haven't according to your 16 year argument. Which is it? How can CO2 levels rise if the temperatures didn't. That disproves that temperature leads CO2. Ooops ...
The point is, even if this '16 year argument' was correct (and it's not because it's based on trying to determine a trend from a small data set) it also poses severe problems for skeptics and deniers alike.
Why should anybody believe in an agenda to enslave common people? Global Warmers want to raise taxes on energy to enforce policy that will have miniscule effect on global warming, but will cut supply of energy, increase the price of everything, therby reducing the standard of living. For whom? Everybody. Severely. If you want to believe in that, go ahead. Who do you think will be considered ignorant in the long term?
I would gladly accept a climate scientist's view if he could provide proof that man's tiny co2 addition to the atmosphere had any effect on climate. 2 plus 2 does not equal 10 and similarly some ice melting somewhere in the world is not proof that's man's co2 is responsible.
AGW already has affected us. Obama just gave $100 billion to the UN for global warming. That affects all of us. We have had many liberties taken away from us in the name of AGW.
According to the 1990 IPCC report the earth warmed up 0.7 degrees C in 350 years. And you want to take in billions of dollars and take away our liberties from that rise? You call that Global Warming? I say it is making the proverbial mountain out of a mole hill.
Show us some truthful facts and prove it before you get our money. Is that asking too much.
Your "As a common person you would not question a surgeon on how they do surgery, " oh yes I would considering the amount of times the wrong limb has been cut off.
Anybody who trusts a Doctor needs to have their brain looked at, biggest charlatan on the planet.
Not for nothing do they sign "The Hypocritical Oath".
Let's put it this way.To believe that not believing global warming will prevent it is wishful thinking. And anyone who truly believes in the Free Enterprise system will believe that the Free Enterprise system will solve global warming.
I guess I shouldn't question an astrologist on how they do astrology either. It still doesn't make it a real science.
BTW... Over 16 years with no warming and another 5 years predicted. Global Warming seems to be in a bit of a standstill. Can you point out which climatologists predicted this? They being so smart and all.
All of those things happened before and they no nothing about climate
Kinda hard to take GW seriously when it's preacher is this guy
Climate Scientists are in fact the ones who know the way the climate works the best. They are the ones who are seeing the patterns, the ice melting, ocean rising and temperatures rising. As a common person you would not question a surgeon on how they do surgery, so why then do you insist on ignoring the people who actually understand climate?
Argument from authority; not valid.
