Consensus? What consensus?

mkpdavies · 07-03-2008, 08:07 PM

http://mclean.ch/climate/What_consensus_col.pdf

Quote:

At the end of the day it is a struggle to
determine exactly what the supposed
consensus refers to. If it applies to a

significant human influence on climate then
it seems impossible to find any credible
evidence of an overwhelming consensus
from experts in the relevant fields. The

Quote:

authors of any section of the IPCC's

Assessment Reports are too few in number
and there was little explicit support shown
by the expert reviewers. The IPCC's only
evident consensus is from government
representatives approving the text of
documents.
The 2003 survey by Bray and von Storch
showed majority, but hardly overwhelming,
support for the claim. The work by Oreskes
was significantly biased from the outset and
based on false assumptions of equal
opportunity for all researchers.
The then chairman of the IPCC Robert T
Watson produced no support for his claim
of an "overwhelming majority of experts"
who believed that human influence was
altering climate to some unspecified
degree. The various media reports about a
consensus that about half the warming was
due to a human influence are devoid of
evidence to support such claims. Back even
further Gore claimed a consensus about an
unspecified level of human influence but
again there is no evidence for that
statement.
The lack of clear evidence for a precisely
stated consensus means that there's not a
lot on which to hang a much-repeated

claim.

Anyone with an internet connection already knows this, but the old school still stick to the same tactics.

Tell a lie over and over again and hope that people will accept it as truth!

Sorry, doesn't cut it any more.

Clippo · 08-03-2008, 08:47 AM

So, your link from a ‘John Mclean’ –

Quote:

computer consultant and occasional travel photographer

I would refer you to :-
Logicalscience.com - The Consensus On Global Warming/Climate Change: From Science to Industry & Religion

( which I have posted before) and even more trivially the New York times survey that I posted a few days ago :-
First survey of New Yorkers on climate change finds majority worried about impacts

Even Dubya accepts it now, as does the oil industry, (including Exxon but who are still vainly subsidising disinformation).

Smackdown methinks

mkpdavies · 08-03-2008, 09:06 AM

If you think having Bush onside is a good thing, then I seriously fear for your mental health.

Clippo · 08-03-2008, 09:19 AM

mpkdavies wrote:-

Quote:

If you think having Bush onside is a good thing, then I seriously fear for your mental health.

I merely implied that he now believes in AGW and is one more addition to the 'billions' consensus.

mkpdavies · 08-03-2008, 09:25 AM

There are billions in consensus against this fraud too, so I couldn't give a **** what warmongers, EU lovers and fascists decide to form consensus about.

Clippo · 08-03-2008, 09:42 AM

mpkdavies wrote:-

Quote:

There are billions in consensus against this fraud too.....

I know it's difficult for you to accept but there are many more billions in favour of the idea of AGW than against.

mkpdavies · 08-03-2008, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clippo

mpkdavies wrote:-

I know it's difficult for you to accept but there are many more billions in favour of the idea of AGW than against.

You are no scientist. You are a conman and a bullshiter. You have no idea what billions of people think. You can guess based on what your beloved masters tell you, but you don't really have any idea.

I do. Because I can measure exaclty how seriously people are taking this scam. When people think they are going to suffer, they take action to avoid it. The vast majority of this planet are living as they normaly do. Some are tinkering, because they have been forced to or think it might help a bit. Even you don't really believe it, because you are still on your computer.

Your argument that Billions believe it is a serious issue holds no water. It is a fraud and more and more people are realising your hypocrisy.

Hartlepool · 08-03-2008, 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkpdavies

http://mclean.ch/climate/What_consensus_col.pdf

Anyone with an internet connection already knows this, but the old school still stick to the same tactics.

Tell a lie over and over again and hope that people will accept it as truth!

Sorry, doesn't cut it any more.

I'm going to print this off mkpd and frame it and print a few copies of it every now and then to drop off werever I go/visit.Thanks.

Clippo · 09-03-2008, 10:23 AM

mpkdavies post #7 says it all about his own delusions.

He can't produce any 'evidence' to counteract my evidence so he he calls me a 'bullshitter', a con man.

He say also that I'm not a scientist - unless he can prove that conclusively, then he is a liar (& I realise completely the implications my latter statement).
Prove or apologise.

mkpdavies · 09-03-2008, 11:08 AM

You are no sicentist. You are a fraud and a religious propaganda merchant.

Science would be ashamed to call you a proponent.

08-03-2008, 09:06 AM	#3 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	If you think having Bush onside is a good thing, then I seriously fear for your mental health. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

08-03-2008, 09:25 AM	#5 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	There are billions in consensus against this fraud too, so I couldn't give a **** what warmongers, EU lovers and fascists decide to form consensus about. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

09-03-2008, 11:08 AM	#10 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 30,604	You are no sicentist. You are a fraud and a religious propaganda merchant. Science would be ashamed to call you a proponent. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Blue Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

09-03-2008, 10:23 AM	#9 (permalink)
Clippo Uber Member Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Cheshire Posts: 2,089	mpkdavies post #7 says it all about his own delusions. He can't produce any 'evidence' to counteract my evidence so he he calls me a 'bullshitter', a con man. He say also that I'm not a scientist - unless he can prove that conclusively, then he is a liar (& I realise completely the implications my latter statement). Prove or apologise.