Global Warming Consensus Looking More...

Global Warming Consensus Looking More Like A Myth

There are 34 comments on the IndyMedia story from Feb 20, 2013, titled Global Warming Consensus Looking More Like A Myth. In it, IndyMedia reports that:

Environment: The global warming alarmists repeat the line endlessly. They claim that there is a consensus among scientists that man is causing climate change.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at IndyMedia.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#22 Feb 27, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>And a professor would? So.
No. I neither claimed that nor made such an argument.

Got anything to offer, or just more childish banter? If the latter, don't bother. I certainly won't bother to reply.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#23 Feb 27, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
No. I neither claimed that nor made such an argument.
Got anything to offer, or just more childish banter? If the latter, don't bother. I certainly won't bother to reply.
Well when you act like and respond like a child tha professor would know it will receive the same in kind. So if unless you have anything to offer and to date that would be a zero don't bother to respond.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#24 Feb 27, 2013
PHuD wrote:
<quoted text>Well when I act like and respond like a child, professor, I should expect the same in kind. So unless I have anything to offer, and to date that would be a zero, I shouldn't bother to respond.
So why DID you?
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#25 Feb 27, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
So why DID you?
Well when you act like and respond like a child tha professor would know it will receive the same in kind. So if unless you have anything to offer and to date that would be a zero don't bother to respond.Now go in your corner for that time out you earned.

“Stop the Brain Rot”

Since: Jan 12

Take a Looonng Vacation

#26 Feb 27, 2013
PHD wrote:
<quoted text>Well when I act like and respond like a child, professor, I should know I will receive the same in kind. So unless you find that I have anything to offer, and to date that would be a zero, you shouldn't bother to respond. Now I need to go into my corner for that time out I've earned.
Don't let me stop you, Junior...:)
litesong

Everett, WA

#27 Feb 27, 2013
phud fetid feces face flip flopper fiend wrote:
Better to be clueless than mindless. You will always remain mindless.
Clue to "phud fetid feces face flip flopper fiend"......

It needs more mindless toxic topix AGW deniers......with a gathering of 50 mindless toxic topix AGW deniers plus one amoeba, one brain cell can be found........ maybe.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#28 Mar 1, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
How could that first claim of yours be true, exactly? Explain in more detail, please.
Scientists talk about a "consensus" all the time as a general indication of what is and what isn't "accepted science," Tina. It's a loose term, of course, but since Space Blues posted the study showing that something like 99.8% of climate-related papers published over the last 20 years or so accept warming as a reality, I'd say that's more than enough to indicate a STRONG consensus. Indeed, it's almost unanimity.
Also, could you please support this far-out claim?
"..the majority of scientist would say that it [AGW] has been disproven with thousands of peer reviewed studies to prove that."
I'd like to see where those "thousands of peer-reviewed studies" come from.
If you want to know where they came from then start looking. There are out there and if you have access to research databases. As for the consensus, the first thing you need to remember that consensus is a political and not a scientific term. Scientist do not think of consensus but in theory. Notice that when people talk about the consensus they are talking about polls or a general belief not theory or fact. The speed of light is not a consenus but a solid number, that evolution is a theory and not the only one.

http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_fi...
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#29 Mar 1, 2013
tha Professor wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't let me stop you, Junior...:)
You don't need help Ahh well you do mentally, but you do a fine job stopping your---self.
PHD

Cibolo, TX

#30 Mar 1, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to know where they came from then start looking. There are out there and if you have access to research databases. As for the consensus, the first thing you need to remember that consensus is a political and not a scientific term. Scientist do not think of consensus but in theory. Notice that when people talk about the consensus they are talking about polls or a general belief not theory or fact. The speed of light is not a consenus but a solid number, that evolution is a theory and not the only one.
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_fi...
You’re only adding more confusion to the mentally disturbed.
Ever wonder why its tha professor instead of the professor?

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#31 Mar 1, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
If you want to know where they came from then start looking. There are out there and if you have access to research databases. As for the consensus, the first thing you need to remember that consensus is a political and not a scientific term. Scientist do not think of consensus but in theory. Notice that when people talk about the consensus they are talking about polls or a general belief not theory or fact. The speed of light is not a consenus but a solid number, that evolution is a theory and not the only one.
http://tigger.uic.edu/~pdoran/012009_Doran_fi...
Did you actually READ your link? It doesn't argue at ALL that there's no scientific consensus, it's an analysis of how different people answer the questions differently:(1) are we warming? & (2) are humans significantly contributing to climate change?

The closer one is to the science, the more likely one is to answer both questions "yes." It does NOT challenge the consensus. Professionals involved in "economic geology" (e.g. petroleum geologists, mining geologists) & meteorologists were least likely to believe the science.

“Denying those who deny nature”

Since: Jun 07

Norfolk va

#32 Mar 5, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Did you actually READ your link? It doesn't argue at ALL that there's no scientific consensus, it's an analysis of how different people answer the questions differently:(1) are we warming? & (2) are humans significantly contributing to climate change?
The closer one is to the science, the more likely one is to answer both questions "yes." It does NOT challenge the consensus. Professionals involved in "economic geology" (e.g. petroleum geologists, mining geologists) & meteorologists were least likely to believe the science.
I did with a smile on my face. In part for the number of "Climate Researchers" who blew it off. I even have it bookmarked so I can use it again and again.

The orginal pupose of the article was to boster the idea of consensus on man made climate change and it instead disproved it quite well.

Since: Jan 13

Location hidden

#33 Mar 6, 2013
tina anne wrote:
<quoted text>
I did with a smile on my face. In part for the number of "Climate Researchers" who blew it off. I even have it bookmarked so I can use it again and again.
The orginal pupose of the article was to boster the idea of consensus on man made climate change and it instead disproved it quite well.
Tina Anne, you remain clueless about this.

The article is about how people who are not climate scientists are less likely to believe the science. The closer one is to the actual science, more likely one is to believe the science.

In other words, there IS a consensus among climatologists. The lack of consensus is among non-climatologists & other members of the public. Deniers like you have successfully confused a lot of people.

Congratulations. The Koch brothers would be proud.
SpaceBlues

United States

#34 Mar 7, 2013
Yale U: Only 30 percent of Americans disengaged (9%), doubtful (13%) or dismissive (8%) about global warming.

http://environment.yale.edu/climate/files/Six ...
SpaceBlues

United States

#35 Mar 7, 2013
HomoSapiensLaptopicus wrote:
<quoted text>
Tina Anne, you remain clueless about this.
The article is about how people who are not climate scientists are less likely to believe the science. The closer one is to the actual science, more likely one is to believe the science.
In other words, there IS a consensus among climatologists. The lack of consensus is among non-climatologists & other members of the public. Deniers like you have successfully confused a lot of people.
Congratulations. The Koch brothers would be proud.
Well, you've found one of the 8% who are dismissive in USA.

Congratulation!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Environment Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fracking: Progress or Poison? (Apr '15) 17 hr Into The Night 1,056
News Pittsfield man fined for illegal asbestos removal Sun Dump Trump 2
News Town hires consultant to study Danby bridge issue (Mar '12) Jul 21 Stairs action eh 6
News Global warming made Paris floods far more likel... (Jun '16) Jul 20 Into The Night 152
News Fireworks pollute the atmosphere and disturb birds Jul 20 CabotRes 2
News New material may help cut battery costs for ele... Jul 8 Solarman 1
News The president keeps a solemn promise to put Ame... Jul 5 Cordwainer Trout 7
More from around the web