Originally posted on 10/28/2013:

Quote Originally Posted by dante1 View Post
Poor loon. Well this I thought was an interesting article concerning why some people still deny the science when science is absolutely sure we are experiencing this change and 95% sure that it is man made. When science claims 95% it is an almost certain conclusion. I am not a scientist but I did some research and 95% is an unbelievably high number, this is no longer even a question in the scientific field.

I hope you listened to it Mr K.
Nothing funnier than an completely clueless lemming who thinks he's intelligent. You say "science" say's it's 95%? Who is "science"? Wasn't aware that science had an actual spokesman,especially since science is a search for truth, and there is no such thing as a certainty, since there can always be a new theory to disprove an old one. Do you really think the laughable UN hand picked IPCC represents science? That's hilarious. The IPCC has been so thoroughly discredited that i'ts almost sad that there are those stupid enough to use them as a source. And yet,they, along with only a few other bozo's (well funded) like Michael Mann and Jim Hanson are the only actual "scientists" that claim the sky is falling. Most credible scientists do not think there is anything unusual, alarming, or panic worthy about current climate patterns, and they certainly don't think man has a serious tangible effect on it. I'm curious, have you ever actually read any of the actual reports of the IPCC? I have. Have you seen their reports and computer model predictions from the early and mid 1990's? If you had, you'd realize how ludicrous their computer models were, because they all predicted levels for 2013 that NEVER HAPPENED. In fact, the creator of the global warming fad predicted in 2001 that many of our coastal cities would be underwater today from 15-21 ft rises in sea level which of course never happened. But he tried real hard to get a climate exchange off the ground so he could get a piece of every trade. Have you ever actually researched the individuals who make up the IPCC, their contributions, and their actual fields of work? Are you aware of all the people who have left (or been booted) because they disagreed with the methods used for computerized predictions?

You like to say that 97% of scientists polled agree about climate change. What you fail to understand, is that particular survey (that is so often used by Obama and others invested in alternative energy), was done by an Australian global warming activist named John Cook. Some of the scientists work he claimed agreed with that theory was Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Niv Shaviv, Richard Tol, Nils-Axel Morner, Wille Soon (who is an actual Rocket Scientist and astro-physicist), and Alan Carlin. These are all scientists who Cook claimed were part of the 97%. Why don't you actually read what each of these scientists said about their true beliefs.

www.populartechnology.net/2013/05/97-study-falsely-classifies-scientists.html


Actually read what these scientists have to say, because according to the Cook survey (by reading their work), they all believe in the man-made global warming theory, and yet, NONE of these scientists that are part of the "97%" actually believe that. Want, the details? Read the links in the link I placed. The actual papers that Cook used to view them as part of the 97% are talked about by the actual scientists who wrote them.

If you want to believe in the tooth fairy too, I don't care, but if you have any credibility, you wont be using the 97% figure when you hear from the scientists themselves who were part of that study and erroneously added to that solely for political purposes by a partisan activist.