The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet |
Posted on 05/19/2008 10:00:16 PM PDT by newbie2008
The names of over 31,000 American scientists that reject the theory of anthropogenic global warming are to be revealed on Monday.
Although this will occur at the National Press Club in Washington, DC., it seems a metaphysical certitude media will completely ignore the event.
Isn't it ironic, dontcha think?
As announced Thursday by PR Newswire via StreetInsider.com:
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM)
Who: Dr. Arthur Robinson of the OISM
What: release of names in OISM "Petition Project"
When: 10 AM, Monday May 19
Where: Holeman Lounge at the National Press Club, 529 14th St., NW, Washington, DC
Why: the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) will announce that more than 31,000 scientists have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming. The purpose of OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.
It is evident that 31,072 Americans with university degrees in science - including 9,021 PhDs, are not "a few." Moreover, from the clear and strong petition statement that they have signed, it is evident that these 31,072 American scientists are not "skeptics."
Folks should recall that this petition was first circulated in 1999 garnering more than 19,000 signatures. The alarmists discounted its significance because there were some duplicate names, and some of the signatories apparently weren't scientists -- or so the story goes.
With over 31,000 now on the list, all with degrees in science -- including 9,000 PhDs! -- what might this do to the nonsensical premise of there being a consensus concerning this issue?
Probably not much, because apart from conservative websites, talk radio hosts, and Fox News, nobody is going to report it.
History’s biggest, goofiest pity party just keeps on a’rollin.
Now that I think about it, I don’t think Al has a Pulitzer or a Tony yet for losing the Presidency. Somebody’s slacking!
I see Dr. Edward Teller is on the list. I'm pretty sure he's been peer reviewed.....more than once......
I suggest you glean through the 31,000 names and check out their CV for yourself.
I say their credentials are valid to debate this issue from an opposing view. You find the facts to disprove me.
I’ve been through this argument- when the journals and books that global warming critics publish are cited, the argument by the liberal left intellectual mafia is that they are not “peer reviewed”. Not withstanding the fact that “the peers” have their panties tightly twisted enough to sneer about the substance of those books and journals.
Or they dig into someone’s background and discover that when they were a grad student, he/she worked under a grant from - gasp- a petroleum institute or GE or some evil commercial entity that is out to rape the planet. Or they spoke at a symposium or receievd funding through the Discovery Institute. How liberal intellectuals HATE the Discovery Institute. Bunch of anti-scientific knuckle dragging neocon creationists. So how could their discoveries possibly be considered valid? Dismissal of the messenger’s worthiness to be heard is the form or “peer review” usually practiced. (But check out the CV of the scientists affiliated).
Frankly with the PC attitude of our universities and even our Govt institutions which are staffed by anonymous but rabidly liberal minions, peer review means - censorship. Soft or hard.
So, it is hard to get “peer reviewed” when the peers have their minds made up, when you are censored from receiving funding to challenge those veiws, when you have to climb over high hurdles and find secondary sources to publish, and when the ultimate weapon is censure (ridicule, professional shunning, or even job loss) if you manage to do so. The “peers’” tactic these days is to attack and discredit the speaker, thus leaving themselves
(so they believe) immune and far too intellectually superior to debate the weight of his argument.
For an example of this elitist censorship, check out the scientific credentials of Rickard Dawkin.
“Not peer reviewed” is a rather ingenuous and vacuous standard, in this day. But hey- knock yourself out.
But also check out the CV of those who criticize them. For starters, have you checked out global leader Algor’s scientific background?
Here ya go, from the past but similar initiative. This was a similar project undertaken by global warming critic Frederick Seitz in the late 1990’s.
Over 31,000 (brave) scientists are listed. The criteria for being included on the petition, the names, the qualifications and an overview of peer review, is provided.
http://www.petitionproject.org/
well there goes their future funding at the global warming trough.
“Check out the credentials of Rickard Dawkin.”
By this do you mean Richard Dawkins? While there are references to Rickard Dawkins on Google. In fact his name is Richard Dawkins, and he has an MA and D.Phil. from Oxford Univ. His genius is in synthesizing a number of different approaches to scientific information and developing a new paradigm.
In looking over the credentials of thed 31K petitioners I see that physicist Edward Teller is headlined at the top. He died in 2003 at the age of 95, and the petition was from 1997 objecting to the Koyto agreement. There certainly were flaws in that agreement, so what is presented about Teller does not indicate whether he rejected the problem of climate change, merely the conclusions at that time. Of course, George Bush rejected the problem at that time, but now, 5 years later he seems rather convinced. How old are the signatures of these 31K scientists, we need to know their current views and even if they are still alive.
In addition, I note that almost 10,000 are engineer, mostly electrical. Where is the list for civil engineers, who are the ones who will have to deal with the flooding of cities and other major storm damage. In all there are only 40 climatologists listed, and I would love to know who they are so I could examine their credentials and state of aliveness. There are many more meteorologists listed, but they do not usually understand climatology very well, as the technical focus is quite different as is the education.
I hope this is enough facts. Give me more details, I will give you more facts.
“His genius is in synthesizing a number of different approaches to scientific information and developing a new paradigm.”
barf alert. His bio is heavy on prizes for literature and humanism and a bit light on hard science. Funny how critical his intellectual type is on others like himself with opposing “paradigms” which they critiques as being light on hard science.
Anyhow, I too have a differnt approach to scientific information and I am close to developing a whole new paradigm - if only I had time between loads of laundry.
BTW, I did indicate the link I gave was to a previous petition from the 1990’s, not the current one. I am not going to go seek out the current one so you can find one spelling error or flaw and discredit it - and me. LOL!
If you cared to seek facts rather than argue, you could answer your own questions about the petition link I did post, because the name of every signer as well as his/her credentials is included in the data at the link.
And before you plink on one or even more of the petitioners’ qualifications - a broader question- Do you need 30,000 climate scientists to make an argument that disproves the current hype that man controls the climate- or isn’t one well-qualified skeptic capable of presenting facts that dispel a much larger myth? There weren’t 30,000 Galileos. There was only one man who figured out one truth.
Have fun.
Has anyone posted the current list yet, as opposed to the old one. If the numbers are about the same, are the people the same, or have only a few names been added?
I’m sorry if you don’t like my questions, but I have a summer place on a barrier island, and a son and two grandchildren in Miami, so I have strong grounds for concern.
It is not your questions that irritate me. It is the fact that the answers are in the link I posted but you wanted me to go dig them out for you.
If you have strong concerns about climate change, then I am sure you will dig to get better answers than Algor’s mass movement based on assuming humans cause such change and can control it by limiting and changing their personal lives.
Article is from a year ago.
“Probably not much, because apart from conservative websites, talk radio hosts, and Fox News, nobody is going to report it.”
Any good links I get I put on my facebook page - most people ignore them but I do get positive comments occasionally - inform the people let them make up their own mind!
Mel
“This needs to be sent to McCain”
Why? Is he out of toilet paper?
The Best Global Warming Videos on the Internet |
Thanks for that.
Cheers
Mel
Well, if they can claim that Fox News is not a “real” news service like CNN or MSNBC then certainly it is no stretch for them to say that these are nor “real” scientists.
If nothing else they turn on the lights in their houses, heat them, and fill their cars. All of that connects them not only to big oil, but big coal too. Terrible!
Google "Vostok ice cores".
Should give you graphs of temperature and carbon dioxide from previous 400,000 years. There were ancient warming periods with high levels of carbon dioxide --- not caused by humans.
http://www.globalwarmingart.com/images/b/bf/Vostok_Plot.png
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.