AGW “Consensus”? Think Again!

AGW = Anthropogenic (Man-made) Global Warming

And there is supposedly “Consensus” among scientists about AGW, right?

Think again!

More Than 650 International Scientists Dissent
Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

This reminds me of how we are told that there is “consensus” about Darwinian Evolution, but in the “Expelled” thread at HotAir.com, it appears that Biblical Creationists outnumber Darwinists by more than 2 to 1. If you add in the other ID supporters who are not Biblical Creationists, the combined group outnumbers Darwinists by more than 3 to 1.

December 11th UPDATE:

China Wants US & West to Give 1% of Annual Wealth to Fight Global Warming

 It snowed in New Orleans today.

December 12th UPDATE:

The U.S. Senate will let President-elect Barack Obama sign up to a U.N. pact to fight global warming in late 2009 even if U.S. climate laws are not yet in place, U.S. Senator John Kerry predicted

So, Obama will sacrifice our national soveignty to this hoax.

December 15th UPDATE:

You really have to be pretty gullible to fall for this hysteria:

AP PANIC: ‘Obama left with little time to curb global warming’…’cooling trend illustrates how fast the world is warming‘… 

UPDATE:
Meltdown of the climate ‘consensus’

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to AGW “Consensus”? Think Again!

  1. Ryan says:

    Wow

    Biblical Creationists outnumbered people who use reason in the Hot Air Forum? Big surprise! People who believe in the scientific method have better things to do with their time.

    In a day where science is completely transparent to those with an interest, how can people be so ignorant. In the scientific community, there is simply no debate about whether humans evolved from lower life forms. No debate whatsoever.

    The only people who think evolution is a sham are religious – and not open to scientific reasoning.

  2. Ryan,

    Thank you for your comment.

    The irony in your comment is very deep, indeed!

    In a day where science is completely transparent to those with an interest, how can people be so ignorant.

    Oh, if only science were “completely transparent”! That is all that honest people seek! I wish that today’s scientific community were “completely transparent”, allowing open and honest debate of all theories, and allowing all evidence to be examined. Instead, there is fascist suppression of anything that deviates from the “Party Line”.

    In the scientific community, there is simply no debate about whether humans evolved from lower life forms. No debate whatsoever.

    That is EXACTLY my point. Open and honest debate is allowed in blogs, but absolutely prevented in the scientific community. If you try to even consider anything that questions the “Consensus” of AGW or the “Consensus” of Darwinian Evolution, you are denied tenure, denied funding, and silenced.

    Those who can’t handle the truth try to silence those who speak it.

    The people who are “not open to scientific reasoning” are people like you.

    What are you afraid of?

  3. Ryan says:

    Open and honest debate is required when two theories collide. These two theories collided a couple of hundred years ago, and one was deemed to provide the best explanation for biological diversity.

    I am not afraid of anything. In fact I have done a lot of research on both sides of the debate, and at the time, I was leaning towards there being a creator.

    If you have a good idea of how it is possible that a magical being in the sky created all of the universe, then by all means, present it.

    Scientists come from all walks of life and all countries of the world. They are not conspiring against free debate. In fact it’s the opposite.

  4. Pingback: “The Lies and Propaganda Get Accepted as Truth’ « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  5. Pingback: Bravo, Chad Myers and Dr. Jay Lehr, Bravo! « I Took The Red Pill (and escaped the Matrix)

  6. UPDATE:
    Meltdown of the climate ‘consensus’

    …the Himalayan claim wasn’t based on peer-reviewed scientific data, or on any data — but on speculation in a phone interview by a single scientist.

    Was science even a real concern for the IPCC?

  7. What’s the track record of those most worried about global warming? Decades ago, what did prominent scientists think the environment would be like in 2010? FoxNews.com has compiled eight of the most egregiously mistaken predictions, and asked the predictors to reflect on what really happened.

    Eight Botched Environmental Forecasts

  8. AGW?
    Fables of the Reconstruction
    (Or, How to Make Your Own Hockey Stick)

  9. What the mainstream media wont tell you about global warming

    ———

    The world’s most viewed site on global warming/climate change:
    http://wattsupwiththat.com/
    Former Inhofe staffer Marc Morano:
    http://www.climatedepot.com/
    Tony Heller:
    http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/
    Steve McIntyre (one of the first to demonstrate that the infamous hockey stick was statistical hogwash):
    http://climateaudit.org/
    Dr. Roy Spencer, one of the fathers of satellite temperature monitoring networks:
    http://www.drroyspencer.com/

    Dr. Judith Curry from Georgia Tech:
    http://judithcurry.com/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s