Reply With QuoteA very useful link, Paullotion - thank you.
Article copied to my file for future use against the global warming alarmists.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Over 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen countries recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called "consensus" on man-made global warming. These scientists, many of whom are current and former participants in the UN IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change), criticized the climate claims made by the UN IPCC and former Vice President Al Gore.
The new report issued by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee's office of the GOP Ranking Member details the views of the scientists, the overwhelming majority of whom spoke out in 2007.
Even some in the establishment media now appear to be taking notice of the growing number of skeptical scientists. In October, the Washington Post Staff Writer Juliet Eilperin conceded the obvious, writing that climate skeptics "appear to be expanding rather than shrinking." Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears "bite the dust." In addition, many scientists who are also progressive environmentalists believe climate fear promotion has "co-opted" the green movement.
Many of the scientists featured in this report consistently stated that numerous colleagues shared their views, but they will not speak out publicly for fear of retribution. Atmospheric scientist Dr. Nathan Paldor, Professor of Dynamical Meteorology and Physical Oceanography at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, author of almost 70 peer-reviewed studies, explains how many of his fellow scientists have been intimidated.
http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...y.SenateReport
Last edited by paullotion; 07-01-2008 at 10:39 PM.
A very useful link, Paullotion - thank you.
Article copied to my file for future use against the global warming alarmists
These '400' scientists are derisively known by the climate scientist community as the 'Inhofe 400'
(& this 'story' has been in the Climate blogs for ages - & my apologies to Besoeker for overlapping comments).
Neither does does it gain any credibility by being promoted in the Washington Post (Wapo) - a significant part of their editorial team are obviously getting rake-offs from Exxon.
Always, these sceptics make counterclaims but rarely if ever come up with hard scientific data (that stands the test of scrutiny), whether peer-reviewed or not.
I suggest you're wasting good memory space Britannist by keeping this article for future use - it won't get any more believable with age (unlike me!)
Last edited by Clippo; 08-01-2008 at 09:31 AM. Reason: slight additions & typos
I think actually what needs to happen is for there to be a full and frank deabte on the issue in this country and elsewhere, I think also Britian has to ensure that it regains where lost and retains where it still has it the ability to make decisions in its natural intrest.
I think that that is more important than whether Britannist is wasting memory on his computer or whether you think my degree is a poor one or that my literacy skills are poor.
But of course time and time again you refuse to speak up for the National Intrest how about answering my question about The next General Election
The envirofascists don't want debate. They just want their own way.
Originally Posted by mkpdavies
So it would appear.
The scientific debate is over !!! it has been for many years …….
Week on week, month on month, year on year since about 1988 scientific evidence accumulates to support the AGW hypothesis, with virtually nothing of significance against it.
That is the reality of the situation and I’m only too pleased to be one of the massive consensus in the world who believe it.
A challenge:-
You (sceptics), come up with some ‘facts’ and I & others here will be glad to debate - but how can anybody debate with the likes of mpkdavies who doesn’t believe the globe is really warming
Rjt wrote:-
It is a cornerstone of our democracy that the way a person votes is kept secret. So, I have no intention of telling you who I am going to vote for ( not sure I even know myself yet). I reiterate, for the nth time, that I am broadly against the EU. Particularly, I want to return to the position of Westminster sovereignty.But of course time and time again you refuse to speak up for the National Intrest how about answering my question about The next General Election
However, like the vast majority of the UK population, (if opinion polls are to be believed), I will choose to vote on party policies on the subjects like, Education, Law & order, the NHS etc.etc. when the time comes
I say to you AGAIN that the issue of the EU and Climate Change will be near the bottom of my list.
The scientific debate is over !!! it has been for many years
Can I say to you that you are quite right to highlight issues such as education, health, law and order etc. But do you not realise that the right to take decisions in these areas is being slowly eroded so is not the right of slef government the crucial one?
I am afraid there is more debate to be had and not just scientifically.
Bookmarks