“If 2007 was the Year of Al Gore, with his movie, Academy Award and Nobel Prize, 2008 just might be the year the so-called scientific consensus that man is causing the Earth to warm begins to crack.
The fissures started to show in 2007: Prominent French physicist Claude Allegre called Gore a crook and equates Gore’s French followers with religious zealots. Weather Channel founder and meteorologist John Coleman said global warming is “the greatest scam in history.” Gore continued to duck open invitations to debate his theory. More than 400 scientists disputed the global warming claims.
Though they were shut out of the meeting, dissenting scientists were able to get a bit of media attention at the December climate conference in Bali.
Richard Lindzen, professor of atmospheric science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, told us that it will take several years for the climate change scare to finally die. But the death spiral will begin at some point, and it looks like the spinning will start in ’08…
Read more here: http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp?secid=1501&status=article&id=283994812311134
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
“More than 400 scientists disputed the global warming claims.”
Amazing how quickly a lie becomes a fact. Swiftboated like an expert.
SJT,
So, please educate us on what constitutes a scientific fact!
“2008 just might be the year the so-called scientific consensus that man is causing the Earth to warm begins to crack.”
Or it might be further confirmed which would be really bad.
Ender:
A scientific consensus is an oxymoron. What, are your a complete idiot? Nothing posted here has meant anything?
God Help us!
Morano’s “400” has nothing to do with science and everything to do with swiftboating, which was apparently invented by Morano. He is so good at it, the “400” scientists is now apparently accepted as fact, even though it is nothing but a lie.
Scientific consensus that’s where you ask a computer to reveal the answer to everything. Otherwise known as a complete waste of time.
DMHO
educate yourself.
Chapter 1 Historical Overview of Climate Change Science
Chapter 2 Changes in Atmospheric Constituents and in Radiative Forcing
Chapter 3 Observations: Surface and Atmospheric Climate Change
Chapter 4 Observations: Changes in Snow, Ice and Frozen Ground
Chapter 5 Observations: Oceanic Climate Change and Sea Level
Chapter 6 Palaeoclimate
Chapter 7 Couplings Between Changes in the Climate System and Biogeochemistry
Chapter 8 Climate Models and their Evaluation
Chapter 9 Understanding and Attributing Climate Change
http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg1.htm
SJT: The IPCC is a political body founded by environmentalists. Nothing wrong with that. It employs like-minded scientists to use computer models to back the politicians’ claims. Nothing wrong with that, either, IF those who make policy fully understand the implications, which they don’t. Then there’s something wrong with that.
GCMs do only what they were designed to do: Calculate rises in temperature, in sea level, in precipitation, in drought, in snow, in floods, in pestilence, in heat-related deaths, for a rise in CO2. They do nothing else, but they do what they were designed to do well.
Regards and Happy New Year
SJT
I have read extensively on the whole subject and I am convinced that the weather we are getting is within normal variability. Despite that and also having read many parts of the 3rd AR I will take up your challenge and read the AR4. Briefly my current position is that the overall global temperature has risen since about 1750. There is not a proven connection to CO2 but CO2 levels are going up (0.01% difference in 100 years) and will continue to do so. The solutions offer to counter this rise are a joke. If such a rise means doom then it is coming. I am not convinced of the Camelot idea of past weather it is dead wrong. I think a rise in temperature is a good thing as opposed to a fall going on what I have read of the past. Unfortunately from the Hadley Centre figures we are looking at a fall 1998. I expect there will be those argue it is our fault if it continues fall and talk of a coming ice age.
The IPCC was founded by the World Meteorological Organisation.
The numbers could be quibbled about SJT – they certainly don’t all appear to be scientists with relevant qualifications – but the substance of the claim ; experts dissenting from the establishment position , remains correct doesn’t it?
Louis – “Nothing posted here has meant anything?”
The day you post something that has scientific merit will be a great day indeed. So far your posts have been completely devoid of anything even approaching science. I do acknowledge that you have managed to see that the greenhouse effect does not mean that scientists think the Earth is covered in glass however progress on other matters like abiotic oil and the functioning of greenhouse gases is still sadly lacking.
We can but hope. BTW how are you doing on the oils are hydrocarbons therefore all hydrocarbons are oil howler you posted.
I suppose mentioning that every word the Swiftboat Veteran’s for Truth said about John Kerry has checked out, would be pointless.
Ok never mind.
There you go James, Morano, the manufacturer of facts. He does it very well, I agree.
Terminally deluded.
SJT why do you buy into it? Your boy Errol spent the better part of a week saying there is lab work proving AGW, then couldn’t come up with the goods. I suppose you have given simular mental exertions toward finding that lab stuff.
But you couldn’t.
Doesn’t that tell you something?
As I have asked before, how do you have a rational debate against stupid?
“SJT,
So, please educate us on what constitutes a scientific fact!”
Heat radiates into space?