U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-16-2011, 01:24 PM
 
1,777 posts, read 1,158,615 times
Reputation: 589

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
An online Harris poll?



Is this the one where they surveyed 46 to get a 80% positive response?

Sorry, but consensus is NOT how science works. All they have are computer climate MODELS that tell us of the disasters to come. Of course, all their previous predictions in the past HAVE NOT COME TRUE. That is why the "consensus" is crumbling around the WORLD.
You didn't even bother to read anything after the words "Harris Interactive," did you?

You're correct, consensus alone is not how science works. However, we have people here denying that a consensus exists, which is ridiculous. As I posted, a survey done by the National Academy for the Sciences done last year shows near unanimity by climatologists about the existence and cause of global climate change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-16-2011, 03:10 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,314 posts, read 38,535,194 times
Reputation: 7106
Quote:
Originally Posted by bc42gb43 View Post
That list of a few dozen scientists from around the world who remain climate change skeptics does not change the fact that the overwhelming scientific consensus agrees that climate change is occurring and is caused by human activity.
No, there is no overwhelming consensus. More and more skeptics, thousands in fact, have come out and explained the hoax from the AGW cabal is just that. A hoax, a fraud.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 03:13 PM
 
7,901 posts, read 8,637,474 times
Reputation: 3185
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
No, there is no overwhelming consensus. More and more skeptics, thousands in fact, have come out and explained the hoax from the AGW cabal is just that. A hoax, a fraud.
Just like evolution, eh?

You Luddites are all the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,314 posts, read 38,535,194 times
Reputation: 7106
Quote:
Originally Posted by bc42gb43 View Post
You didn't even bother to read anything after the words "Harris Interactive," did you?

You're correct, consensus alone is not how science works. However, we have people here denying that a consensus exists, which is ridiculous. As I posted, a survey done by the National Academy for the Sciences done last year shows near unanimity by climatologists about the existence and cause of global climate change.
Of course, the ones that RUN and operate these organizations agree, but their members sure don't form a consensus. Again, if other scientists can't reproduce the work of the cabal, the science is bad.

We have a plethora of predictions, from polar bears, ice cap melt, himalayan melt, sea level rise, none which have come true.

In fact, the MET predicted mild, snowless winters the last three years in the UK, they said in 2000, kids wouldn't know what snow looked like, they said hurricanes for the last 3 years would be devastating (zilch), they've made all these outlandish predictions that fail to come to pass.

They look like fools and that's why you see the push for "carbon" policy going down the drain.

http://www.climatedepot.com/a/9035/S...-UN-IPCC--Gore
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...enough_to.html
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/07/3...pro-agw-views/

The time of fear mongering and doomsday scenarios is over - the hoax is exposed.

There can be NO consensus when THOUSANDS of relevant, credentialed, world renowned scientists disagree with the AGW believers.

Back on topic - which is the NPR bigwigs donations to their masters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-16-2011, 03:40 PM
 
Location: Boston, MA
10,977 posts, read 7,753,834 times
Reputation: 5326
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanrene View Post
Of course, the ones that RUN and operate these organizations agree, but their members sure don't form a consensus. Again, if other scientists can't reproduce the work of the cabal, the science is bad.

We have a plethora of predictions, from polar bears, ice cap melt, himalayan melt, sea level rise, none which have come true.

In fact, the MET predicted mild, snowless winters the last three years in the UK, they said in 2000, kids wouldn't know what snow looked like, they said hurricanes for the last 3 years would be devastating (zilch), they've made all these outlandish predictions that fail to come to pass.

They look like fools and that's why you see the push for "carbon" policy going down the drain.

SPECIAL REPORT: More Than 1000 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims - Challenge UN IPCC & Gore | Climate Depot
American Thinker Blog: Are 32,000 Scientists Enough to Question Global Warming 'Consensus?'
American Chemical Society members revolting against their editor for pro AGW views | Watts Up With That?

The time of fear mongering and doomsday scenarios is over - the hoax is exposed.

There can be NO consensus when THOUSANDS of relevant, credentialed, world renowned scientists disagree with the AGW believers.

Back on topic - which is the NPR bigwigs donations to their masters.
Anecdote: I have liberal friend who owns a vacation home on an island off the coast of Maine. This winter he was at that home doing some repairs when a Nor'easter hit. He said that he had never had the misfortune of witnessing a tempest of that magnitude before. He declared that it must have been a one hundred year storm. He then smugly said to me "No global warming huh?!". A couple of months later my wife and I were walking on Wells Beach which is about 30 miles south of his vacation home and faces directly to the Northeast where the worst wind and waves would come from. Not one iota of damage to the seaside homes.
The one thing he left out was that he is never at his vacation home in the winter.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top