Name some of the other ones. You’ve hinted that there may be some, but I’ve not seen one iota of evidence so far.

Report comment to moderator

If you can’t be bothered to read the science paper and refute it’s claims, but keep harping on the fact that not all the signatory’s can be legitimate, then you’re missing the whole point. And you really don’t have anything to say about the issue. Who cares about all the signatorys? What about the shoddy pseudo scientific claims made by Al Gore et al?

Even if only 10% of those signatories are relevant (and I think it’s probably more than that with 9,000 PHD’s signing on) it’s still only a minor point.

What about the paper and it’s points? The truth I want to get at is what is actually happening. Is the earth warming catastrophically or not? If it is, is man causing it? The stuff I’ve been reading indicate to me, that the IPCC has been indulging in politics and wealth redistribution more than it’s indulged in science, and that Al “$how me the Carbon Credit$ $tock dividend$” Gore has more to gain than votes or credibility by promoting the GW scare.

And you still haven’t answered my other question. Where do you see a “vast majority” of scientists supporting the Global Warming claims? Sources please.

Report comment to moderator

Why this documented fact doesn’t seem to matter to people like Make It Man and The Real AJ, I don’t understand. I agree that some, even many, climate scientists don’t agree that anthropogenic warming is happening. But there is nowhere close to 31,000 of them.

Truth matters, y’know.

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

Report comment to moderator

“Even if true, why then does Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine’s petition against global warming alarmism continue to add signatures to its over 31,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 with PhDs? Just who are the UN’s “expert reviewers” whose opinions have been elevated to the realm of “indisputable?”

Solomon contacted the Secretariat of the IPCC to learn the names of these 2,500 scientists and just what exactly they endorsed. Writes Solomon:

“I planned to canvas them to determine their precise views. The answer that came back from the Secretariat informed me that the names were not public, so I would not be able to survey them, and that the scientists were merely reviewers. The 2,500 had not endorsed the conclusions of the report and, in fact, the IPCC had not claimed that they did. Journalists had jumped to the conclusion that the scientists the IPCC had touted were endorsers and the IPCC never saw fit to correct the record. There is no consensus of 2,500 scientist-endorsers. Moreover, many of those 2,500 reviewers turned thumbs down on the studies that they reviewed – I know this from my own interviews with them, conducted in the course of writing a book about scientists who dispute the conventional wisdom on climate change.”

OK, I’m done. Goodnite all.

Report comment to moderator

“A June 2nd piece at WaPo lamenting the Senate’s probable failure to pass S.3036 (for now) further exemplified the left’s disregard for the science by stating that:

“The world has clamored for U.S. leadership on climate change. Yet for seven years the Bush administration denied and dithered while the planet warmed.” [emphasis added]

An interesting accusation, particularly considering that the planet stopped warming 2 years before Bush took the oath in 2001, has been cooling since 2002 and that this year’s was the fourth coldest May since 1979.

That’s right — the University of Alabama, Huntsville just published its satellite-derived temperature anomalies for May. The figures depict a global temperature drop of 0.195°C between April and May, and a drop of 0.379°C since May of last year. Anthony Watts, one of myriad scientists attributing recent cooling (and global temperature anomalies overall) to the activity of that yellow dwarf star at the center of our solar system and other historically correlative natural forces, notes that: [emphasis in original]

“Even more impressive is the change since the last big peak in global temperature in January 2007 at 0.594°C, giving a 16 month ∆T of -0.774°C which is equal in magnitude to the generally agreed upon ‘global warming signal’ of the last 100 years.”

Please consider those words carefully.”

Report comment to moderator

Here’s another good piece on the scam known as global warming. There is not a consensus of scientist. Politicians are another story.

http://tinyurl.com/6nczvz

Report comment to moderator

Faces of Meth:
http://www.drugfree.org/portal/drugissue/methresources/faces/index.html

This site shows not only photos but discusses all the other associated problems:
http://www.anti-meth.org/photos2.html

Especially shocking to me is the photo sequence of the attractive blond woman who looks to be about 80 after 10 years of use.

Even more tragic is what happens to children stuck in a home affected by this awful drug.

Report comment to moderator

I’m searching for the pictures of accelerated aging I saw once, and came across this book. I haven’t read it or even viewed the short video here by the author, but here’s the link on Amazon:
http://www.amazon.com/Beautiful-Boy-Fathers-Journey-Addiction/dp/0618683356

If I find those pix, I’ll post a link back for you.

Report comment to moderator