So we have a no name individual, dana1981, challenges three noted real climate scientist and you think that person's opinions are more important than MINE?<quoted text>
Examining Dr. John Christy's Global Warming Skepticism
12 June 2011 / http://tinyurl.com/mcztwfx
By far the three most prominent and most frequently referenced climate scientists who are "skeptical" of the dangers of human-caused global warming are Dr. Richard Lindzen of MIT, and Drs. Roy Spencer and John Christy of the University of Alabama at Huntsville (UAH). These are not your typical unqualified "skeptics", like so many others (i.e. computer programmers, politicians, and former political consultants). No, these are genuine climate scientists who receive government research grants, publish peer-reviewed studies, and have not received any funding from fossil fuel companies in recent years. Thus their arguments are well worth examining. Is there scientific validity to their skepticism?
This question is of particular importance since they have recently received so much media attention. Dr. John Christy, for example, has recently testified before U.S. Congress, appeared on an Australian radio talk show, and on a Canadian radio show. In these appearances, he advised his audiences that there is a great deal of uncertainty regarding man-made global warming, and that we need not take significant steps to reduce human greenhouse gas emissions. This advice directly contradicts the findings of the vast majority of Dr. Christy's peers, most recently by the Australian Climate Commission, which concluded that we know beyond a reasonable doubt that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming, and it is critical that we immediately implement policies to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions.
Again, the writer says that these three scientists are in the minority but that is totally false as are all of his premises.