Out of 13,950 only 23 article peer reviewed articles dispute Man Made Climate Change

Here:

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/03/22/more-evidence-the-medieval-warm-period-was-global/

 

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.[1][2] Scientists create scientific theories from hypotheses that have been corroborated through the scientific method, then gather evidence to test their accuracy. As with all forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and do not make apodictic propositions; instead, they aim for predictive and explanatory force.[3][4]

The strength of a scientific theory is related to the diversity of phenomena it can explain, which is measured by its ability to make falsifiable predictions with respect to those phenomena. Theories are improved as more evidence is gathered, so that accuracy in prediction improves over time. Scientists use theories as a foundation to gain further scientific knowledge, as well as to accomplish goals such as inventing technology or curing disease.

 

So do the oceans. So unless these progressive dolts plan on plugging volcanoes and putting a blanket on the world's oceans they aren't doing anything but ensuring that America and the EU fall behind China, India and all of the emerging industries around the rest of the world.

 

America and the EU have been doing that voluntarily...

China is the number 1 producer of CO2

 

Don't get me wrong. I hate pollution, and absolutely prefer clean air and water.

That said, I do not subscribe to the claim that the Earth is warming and in peril.

 

And the ensuing mini-ice age that followed in the 1490s up to the 1800s.

 

North Africa was the result of a polar shift. The Sahara used to be some of the most fertile land on the face of the earth. You're not blaming the polar shift on those evil dinosaurs are you?

 

Nor do I.

Those moron commie progressives think the world needs to be run by the UN and America needs to pay for it. I think not.

The UN is the most useless organization in the world. Hey, When does Haiti get fixed? The UN is running that.....

They dont even have any plans to use the money to fix the climate.. None whatsoever....

You havent heard of a UN plan to build giant Ionic Breeze Air fresheners have you? No??

Thats cause they dont exist, and the UN has no plans to build any...

They just want money to "redistribute" to other nations.

 

Says the poster using suite instead of suit.

 

Its those darn dinosaurs farting every where...

 

Would the scientists who wrote these articles be some of the ones polled?

 

Yeah, North Africa is Saved !!!

 

I think you might be wrong there - Unless you have something to show there was a polar shift 10,000 years ago

 

Oh, Im sure hes got the same satelite data global warmers used to get their data from 10,000 years ago..

 

You have heard of core samplings from ice, correct?

With a statement like that, someone could claim you are not all there. Strange, I never heard what you claim. What scientists? Name them.

Is that not a bit simplistic, arrogant, and stupid? 100% accuracy or it's fully flawed. Really... commit suicide on TV?

Try this. No conservative thought has been put into practice and succeeded. No laws, no science (lack of), nothing. You people get kicked around and straightened out but you keep coming back for more.

Hurricanes, as you should know, have more variables than most any other science. We can predict hurricanes because they exist. Their paths and surrounding air masses change... and the air masses ahead of them by hundreds of miles are in constantly in flux... temperature, barometric pressure, lifting mechanisms are not stable. Climate change is long-term study over a period of an extended period of time... usually hundreds to thousands of years. Are you aware of the extreme interglacial periods?... one of which produced warmer temperatures than today within a glacial period? Here below is the Wicomico shoreline of Florida during the Sangamonian (interglacial) period just after the Illinoian stage (glacial) during the Pleistocene epoch (2.588 million--11,000 years ago).

 

You really are very bad at this aren't you. One would think if you want to be snippy you might wonder what the evidence is for a changed climate in North Africa. But suppose that would take some effort on your part, so I can forget that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saharan_rock_art#Prehistoric_Sahara

 

Those silly cave painters prolly drove their America made gas guzzlers everywhere around the sahara, and wrecked it.....

Stupid humans !!!

 

Stop throwing your big numbers around! Any conservative knows that .16% is WAY more than 50% , gee it might even be more than a 100%....

 

No, wait a minute. The Sahara goes through wet to dry periods along with glacial and interglacial periods. The Sahara was under water several million years ago and greens-up every 7-9000 years,

Basilosaurus. Lived 40 million to 35 million years ago,

 

I thought libs would applaud the story posted by jcarlilesiu.

Now you can sleep better at night since you do not have to be traumatized by the fear of global warming.

The lib scientists have cried WOLF! before and chances are they are doing it again.

 

What lib scientists (names), when, and what did they cry wolf about?

 

AGW really boils down to Evolution.

If the deniers of AGW admit the science behind AGW is sound, then (GASP!) they may just have to admit that Evolution is also true.

And since Evolution conflicts with thier bible, Evolution cannot be true. Since Evolution simply cannot be true, then AGW simply cannot be true.

This is a battle of ideology, and its unfortunate, since the only curent planet we can live on is Earth and we are ruining the planet.

 

You might be onto something here - Because in this thread scientist do something they believe in and suddenly scientists are smart again

http://www.politicalforum.com/current-events/290464-coal-cleanest-energy-source-there.html

 

You would have to ask the reporters and editors of Time Magazine which scientists they were getting their information from.

Assuming Time was not just making the who thing up as journalists have been known to do.

 

They have nothing to do with one another.

Also, Evolution is actually a scientific theory. Man made global warming is not.