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.
The difference here is that the oil company guys really don't collect any data. They just try to critique the findings of those who do.
My guess is that 97% of all GW alarmist scientists have never collected any data either. They just use other people's data and we know some of it was destroyed and some was fudged.......
Try to get your information about climate science from peer-reviewed scientific journals, not random websites.
What good are peer-reviewed journals? I mean, that's sort of the entire point here, that nobody who disagrees with the global warming agenda is considered a reputable scientist. If you only accept information from reputable scientists and only scientists who agree with the existing theory are considered reputable, then what's the point? It's a self fulfilling prophecy type situation, where conclusions are arrived at by approved means and only means which arrive at those conclusions are approved.
What good are peer-reviewed journals? I mean, that's sort of the entire point here, that nobody who disagrees with the global warming agenda is considered a reputable scientist. If you only accept information from reputable scientists and only scientists who agree with the existing theory are considered reputable, then what's the point? It's a self fulfilling prophecy type situation, where conclusions are arrived at by approved means and only means which arrive at those conclusions are approved.
The anti AGW scientists don't do much research but here is a list of some of the skeptics who have had papers published.
"If we were to double the rate at which CO2 in the atmosphere is increasing in comparison to the last 30 years, it would still take well over a century to get to just two degrees of warming from CO2. If we tripled the rate, it would take almost four centuries to get to three degrees."
How can "the worst effects be behind us" when we're still dumping an ever-increasing amount of CO2 into the air? It's not as if every ton added beyond some point has zero effect, you know... Additionally, even if the temperature only goes up a few degrees, it can still have profound effects upon the climate and thus upon human civilization.
It never ceases to amaze me how the deniers are perfectly willing to play Russian roulette with human civilization if the alternative is their Hummer being more expensive to gas up and adding some solar panels to the roof.
Excuse me, but to clarify your confusion, the effects of man-made global warming have barely begun.
And when you have facts, not theory, present them that man is warming the planet.
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.
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.
