Can I get a believer to say "There is no proof that the Globe Cooled from the 1940s to the 1970s"?

I would like to have such a quote on record before moving into all of this.

I live in Utah and yes the drinking water is fairly decent here.

When I was in the Marine Corps I traveled all over though. Let me say that in San Diego the water is absolutely disgusting and you cant even really drink it from the tap.

Believe me I spent a heck of alot of money buying bottled water.

Ive also lived in Japan and Ireland (have family in Ireland, not when I was in the Corps) and I will say that our water here is better than Japan IMO, but as for Ireland.....Someone correct me if im wrong, it WAS a long time ago. But I remember the water being great.

I think there is MORE than enough proof to back up global warming and so little to say it isnt man made. But clearly after all of this debate that has gone on both online and on the news etc etc... im not going to be able to sway your opinion.

I just hope people like you are right...I really do. I just dont think you are.

__________________
"The marvel of all history is the patience with which men and women submit to burdens unnecessarily laid upon them by their governments"

--George Washington

"Never spend your money before you have earned it."

--Thomas Jefferson

"One man with courage is a majority."

--Thomas Jefferson

This was a random sample of 30 people, and you show no evidence that heaps of people have called them. Not to mention...what, they no longer answer their phones/make sure they know teh caller ID?

Like I said, thats about 800 people. If you feel thats the accurate number presented by the list its alot less compelling than your orininal one- nevermind that the vetting for this is the honesty system...this source is trash. I notice you ignore how difficult it is to verify.

You said that it shows what they think. It clearly doesn't. Its nice to see you can ignore parts you can't respond to with the best of them.

I can't take anyone seriously that feels the need to deride their opponents as such. "The green industry is huge" - what a joke. Its nothing compared to the resouces sector, and unlike Exxon and co. it goes in the right order- wealth from science, not science from wealth.

Lets take a moment to see how far you've come-

I know for so many you don't need to be right, you just need to keep talking. Or maybe you just didn't apply as much thought to it as you now have. Happy to acknowledge you were wrong then than?

As for the IPCC report I doubt it, atleast we can check the names. And when we do, I see plenty of scientists, and relevant ones too. I haven't done the numbers, and I'm not about to generalise as to what teh percentage is.

Do you read your own quotes? This guy is the basis for your rejection of the IPCC report- and hes in the pay of big oil. Also the later quote-

Would certaily be being applied to him.

By the way I think the various IPCC reports are being confused with each other.

There is NO direct evidence linking Global Warming to anthropogenic greenhouse gasses.

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...y.SenateReport

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.c...9-C3F02278F4CF

This was his email:

Michael T. Eckhart Replied:

You don't need to go reading through the whole article i you don't want but don't go assuming AGW scientists arn't under attack.

Doesn't a petition of 15,000 even make you want to consider that there are alot of scientists out there that disagree? What if we did the petition again but took even more measures to validate it? what kind of number do you think we would come up with?

Can't dispute the facts? swear them:

http://robertd.wordpress.com/2008/03...ts-smear-them/

The green industry IS huge Australia alone has poured billions into trying to cut carbon emissions. Buisness is also exploding because of it millions is being spent on biofuels, solar energy or the electric car everybodys sucked in and big buisness feeds of the middle classes desire to do something:

http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=22900

And how can you blame an oil company for investing in climate research? The entire planet has blindly embrassed AGW like its fact which it certainly isn't! These are people who stand to loose billions because of the lies spread by Gore and the U.N.

[quote=Ronin-Talgar;503369]I know for so many you don't need to be right, you just need to keep talking. Or maybe you just didn't apply as much thought to it as you now have. Happy to acknowledge you were wrong then than?

I want you to note that the IPCC 2100 number is not a figure that shows how many scientists agree with the theory. It's the number that contributed to the report.

I want you to have a look at this 'An Analysis of the Review of the IPCC
4AR WG I Report' it gives an insight as to what scientists who reviewed the report wanted to change.

http://mclean.ch/climate/IPCC_review...d_analysis.pdf

As i mentioned before a large number of the IPCC 2100 didn't agree with the theory and weren't listened to by the IPCC it gives an insight into the strong bias in there report.

If you move down to page 19 you'll see just a sample of just some of the comments from the reviewers:

Oww and this is only part A a sample of the responses which weren't adressed.

Part B shall we:

Note: The CCSP report was never reviewed!

There is a GIANT bias in the IPCC report of all the scientists who contributed MANY of them were ignored.

Hi there Chief. It heartens me that you took the time for such a lengthy response. However, as I don't subscribe to the school of thought which allowfor people to only address points where they feel they have some advantage, I won't respond to it until you respond to this squarely:

"Lets take a moment to see how far you've come-

[Emphasis added]

I know for so many you don't need to be right, you just need to keep talking. Or maybe you just didn't apply as much thought to it as you now have. Happy to acknowledge you were wrong then than?"

-and the complicity of Lindzen, your reliance apon him and your failure to connect the dots when you said I hadn't refered to any of your names. I'm sure that will be wonderfully humbling for you.

No point arguing with someone who can't admie they're wrong afterall. Has WA ceded to the US btw?

Oh btw, seeing as this is a battle of copy and paste now, heres a little from the skeptics of the skeptics regards Chief's last link:

http://www.skepticalscience.com/glob...-consensus.htm

"Hey, remember John McLean? The guy who kept steering Andrew Bolt into brick walls? Well he's teamed up with Tom Harris of the NRSP to accuse the IPCC of lying about the scientific support for its reports:

In total, only 62 scientists reviewed the chapter in which this statement appears, the critical chapter 9, "Understanding and Attributing Climate Change". Of the comments received from the 62 reviewers of this critical chapter, almost 60% of them were rejected by IPCC editors. And of the 62 expert reviewers of this chapter, 55 had serious vested interest, leaving only seven expert reviewers who appear impartial.

First, there were much more than 62 reviewers for chapter 9. McLean and Harris have only counted the reviewers of the second order draft and ignored the more numerous comments on the first order draft.

Second, they mislead by giving the impression that 60% of the reviewers disagreed with the IPCC, but half of the comments (572 of them!) were made by Vincent Gray, with 97% of them rejected. Only 16% of the comments by other reviewers were rejected. Gray was also responsible for most the rejected comments on the first order draft. Examples of Gray's rejected comments include:

Insert after "to" "the utterly ridiculous assumption of"

Insert after "Bayesian" "(or super-guesswork)"

Insret before "Calibrated" "Bogus" "

Then again, who the hell am I quoting? God only knows. It sucks this occurs in a vacuum.

Sure.

Hmm perhaps he was a bad example..

Whats with the anti-americanism? hmm? gotta bit of a grudge against capitalism do we???

Whats your point? i don't have time to syphon through your cynical remarks..

Joy of Joys.

Just enquiring after your flag choice in the corner there.

Not sure what that has to do with capitalism, but yes, quite a bit to be grudgefull about, not on a personal level perhaps but more of a caring for other people bent.

Edit: I believe the word you are looking for is sift- might not be spelled that way though. Just that I don't really know if mine was an accurate source, and that I wish there was a definitive argument going on somewhere, not multiple ones as we, and they, are having.