What is dishonest is the idea that the worlds best climate scientists are the ones telling us we are causing all this warming. Watch the video with Donna Laframboise. It talks about this. How can someone that is still a grad student be a lead author of IPCC reports be the worlds top...
Certainly not enough to KNOW we were the cause. When you state that your focus is on human-induced climate change, you don't leave any room for looking at alternative reasons. Certainly you can see the problem here, or are you too blinded?
Bigger and bigger? WTF are you talking about? This has been the deal from the get go. However you received the notion that we were completely blaming climatologists is beyond me.
The IPCC was created in 1988 and this is in their articles of organization or as they call it "Principles...
NO NO NO NO NO. I never said that the Climatologists created this. In fact I have always held the position that it was created via politics and political agenda.
Edit: Just to clarify. Science has looked into it in the past and saw a possibility. Politics saw the potential for crisis and...
Many of them are activists. Not to mention they'd lose all credibility. Who'd ever hire them again if they admitted to fraud? Hold the line and when they are proven wrong, it doesn't look as bad to say, well we weren't entirely sure so we were leaning to the side of caution.
Considering the fact that any amount of warming that has been occurring over the last several decades is within the realm of natural variability, I'd say no, it's not worth wasting trillions of dollars and killing economies to do potentially nothing and AT BEST basically nothing.
Well, one link is about something being known over 40 years ago, so not credible because we still don't 100% know. If we did, we could model it accurately. Another is Wiki which was covered above. The other is interesting, accept I literally have not heard of any of those organizations but 1...
Just to clear this up. Stating that man is causing warming is a fact. Within that fact you can have varying degrees of which that is true. It could be that man is causing 5% of the warming, or it could mean that man is causing 90%. Both of those scenarios are covered under the initial...
Proof? Maybe that was happening back in the 70's but today, where is the proof? I have heard a lot of Professors talk on this subject that explicitly come out and say they aren't being paid by anyone (oil specific) and said they refuse to so that people cannot make that argument against them...