Re: Global Warming: Junk science at it's [best] worst

On Mon, 17 Sep 2007 07:49:28 -0700, in sci.electronics.design
bill.sloman@xxxxxxxx wrote:

On Sep 17, 6:20 am, Richard The Dreaded Libertarian <n...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
On Sat, 15 Sep 2007 19:37:41 -0700,bill.slomanwrote:
On Sep 16, 8:56 am, JosephKK <joseph_barr...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx bill.slo...@xxxxxxxx posted to
On Sep 15, 10:26 am, Simon S Aysdie <gwh...@xxxxxx> wrote:
On Sep 14, 12:21 pm, Benj <bjac...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<snip>

Exxon can be trusted to sell petrol at the advertised price, from
gas stations carrying the Exxon-Moboil label.

When they sell anti-global warming propaganda, they do it through
front organisations. Check out

www.exxonsecrets.org

Initially Shell and BP were also sceptical about global warming, and
their staff scientists were up front about it, but when the
scientific evidence became unambiguous the Shell and BP scientists
accepted it and the company managements didn't go over to
subsidising the denial industry.

Please provide credible backup

What would constitute credible backup?
And which particular piece of information do you want me to back up?

Anything that can be backed up by actual, observable facts, rather than the readings from the crystal ball or the Book of Al.

Check out the IPCC report

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPCC_Fourth_Assessment_Report

Which you don't have, hence the evasion.

The IPCC's opinion is an expert review of the current peer-reviewed
literature, which is about a good as actual observable facts get.

You've got to be pig-ignorant to be unaware of this.

Your religion has no clothes, Bill.

Oddly enough, most people have enough sense to be able to distinguish
between opinions based on scientific research, and religious dogma
based on what some clowns claim to believe they was told by their tame
hallucinations.

If long years of exposure to conciousness-raising medications have
rendered you incapable of making this subtle distinction, you realy
aren't in a postion to make a useful contribution to the debate.

Any comments about what Freeman Dyson says about the climate models?
There are a couple of clips on youtube, easily locatable


Martin
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Common Sense - The Answer To The Fear Mongering of Global Warming
    ... This is not opinion. ... Does Not Make These 'Opinions' Facts. ... but when the majority of scientists make a statement based ... Wine vineyards only grow in specific conditions, ...
    (rec.radio.shortwave)
  • Re: Common Sense - The Answer To The Fear Mongering of Global Warming
    ... This is not opinion. ... Exist and that We 'may-be' Loooking at a Period of Climate Change ... But if you stepped back a frame, he went on, you started to see that scientists today are looking at a snapshot, a highly cropped snapshot without context. ... Wine vineyards only grow in specific conditions, one of which is average temperature. ...
    (rec.radio.shortwave)
  • Re: Gore - A Pathetic Embarrassment To US Science - so sey the y lying GOP shills
    ... statements of climate scientists, is that other changes may well ... Their uniformity of opinion catches my ... on such ideas as rightard politicians have the legal right to treat ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Can Eyesight be Improved Naturally?
    ... or scientists like Dr. Stirling Colgate ... you will lose your distant vision permanently. ... Subject: The dynamic natural eye. ... Just one man's opinion. ...
    (sci.med.vision)
  • Re: Evolution Deniers
    ... >>> You may have a right to your opinion. ... >>> Scientists are very good at interpreting the data they collect. ... >>> But science is correct when it talks about missing data. ... What is your faith based ...
    (talk.origins)
Quantcast