“We need to consider the very real possibility that carbon dioxide – which is necessary for life on Earth and of which there is precious little in the atmosphere – might well be like the innocent bystander who has been unjustly accused of a crime based upon little more than circumstantial evidence.” Read more here.
Footer
About Me
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
Read morePayPal
There have been 3 major papers on this since May 2008, including a CO2/warming advocate (Keenlyside) and they all agree the oceanic oscillations are controlling world temperatures. Why did a body of 4000 scientists working for the IPCC miss this natural phenomena entirely and slant the evidence toward CO2?
It demonstrates very clearly that consensus and the vast majority have no meaning in science, and that those who accept consensus and rhetoric are truly fools.
Gordon,
the answer is simple – Anthony Watts picked on it in another way – it purely a new means of taxation which, once you sign the Kyoto Protocol, generates a revenue stream for the UN. They dearly would like to be freed from the fiscal constrainsts imposed by the U.S, especially the Republicans who can see through the UN charade.
Unfortunately the useful idiots here have not twigged, or God forbid, actually prefer a world government based in the UN. Lefties I know well harbour this dream.