Climate science arrogance

Sorry, but only some scientists have been saying similar things. Consensus is not science nor does it have a place in science. The CAGW meme has become political and destructive of actual science.

 

You assume that government employees are inherently liberal without backing it up. If this were the case, why are there more government employees in conservative states?

http://www.governing.com/news/headl...t-workers-are-more-conservative-analysis.html

Here are some scientists who are not named Cook:

http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2010/06/04/1003187107.abstract

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2009EO030002/abstract

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/306/5702/1686.full#

 

The existence of consensus is not itself the evidence. Ask Galileo.

 

Never said it was. And calling a blogger a cartoonist does not refute the arguments they post either.

 

Deniers in general feel a need to demonize and attack specific people, since they stink so mightily at discussing the actual science. In denierland, they think that if their jihad succeeds in personally destroying Cook or Mann or Gore or anyone, it will magically invalidate all of AGW theory, even if the results that they're trying to discredit have been replicated a thousand times by different people.

 

No there have been numerous studies on the consensus as well as a HUGE number of "consensus statements" made by various scientific societies - none of which have anything to do with John Cook - who, seems in the minds of some to have replaced Al Gore as the leader of the scientific conspiracy to create global warming

 

Love the way they never mention that he has degrees in Physics and is the Climate Science Communications fellow for the University o Queensland either

As if being a cartoonist is somehow less than human

 

Still sticking with consensus instead of science eh? John Cook started the consensus nonsense.

 

Actually he did not - but once again we have a statement without factual proof

http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus

 

“..I’m not sure what you are trying to prove, but you will undoubtably be able to prove your pre-existing opinion with this survey! I’m sorry I even started it!..” ~Doran

 

You present that as if it was Doran saying it and not anonymous feedback on the Doran/Zimmerman survey itself.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/07/18/what-else-did-the-97-of-scientists-say/

 

Actually, conservatives started the consensus nonsense when they falsely claimed there wasn't any.

 

You mean they disputed the claim of consensus so they started it? LOL

 

Human nature is not conspiracy. You are trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

 

I assume it because the bureaucrats who work in Washington D.C. vote democrat hence the huge democratic voting block in suburban D.C.

 

"Climate Science Communications Fellow" means taxpayer funded propagandist. Mr. Cook has made quite a life for himself pushing AGW. From being a loser living in a basement he now has a nice job as a researcher at UQ and the title of "Climate Science Communications Fellow". I dont see such a person ever taking a risk to give that up. If AGW loses political momentum he is back in the basement.

And no we dont have to spend all our efforts discrediting Cook. He does that himself. After all we didn't Photoshop he and his friends as Nazis. They did that themselves. Here is Mr. Cook photoshopped as Himmler taken from his own forum.



The original



You backed the wrong horse Bowerbird.

 

Hah!!! "That's a good one coach Jones"