Global Warming Update

Discussion in 'Killingsworth Court, Formerly The General Forum' started by Frog79, Feb 8, 2012.

  1. Something like 52 scientists participated in the writing and it is filled with errors and nonscientific journalistic propaganda which they attempted to pass off as "peer reviewed" research. Does that not trouble you?
     
  2. Yes! Another great British colloquialism.
     
  3. Bollocks...You're right!
     
  4. Here's how your 'consensus' IPCC report did:





    http://sites.google....gquestions/ipcc

    Here's how the vaunted IPCC 'scientific consensus' does business:

    http://www.usnews.co...ake-no-accident
     
  5. I think we can safely say we have just gone over into the fn zone!

     
  6. I assume that you arrived at the number '52' in much the same way you arrived at the upper and lower limits earlier. The 2007 report ALONE had 620 authors. That's not to mention the 4 other massive reports and various other supplemental reports. The number of people who contributed to the IPCC reports is north of 2000.
     
  7. But by God, that OISM petition thing is the exemplar of rigor ...
     
  8. Like Groucho said, any petition that would accept me as a signatory......or something like that....
     
  9. Once again you [Craig James]/ume wrong and show your stupidity. There were 52 authors of the Policy Summary, which is the part of the report that gets passed around to the press and politicians and is passed off as a 'consensus'. There other contributors but they don't write the report and often disagree with the final version. Some have quit the IPCC in protest. Anyway, as I show above, one of the authors admits throwing a little propaganda here and there while trying to pass it off as valid scientific research. But you have no problem with that? Nah, I thought not.
     
  10. At least all 31K are scientists, unlike the IPCC 'consensus' which includes journalists as scientific experts in its reports. Maybe they can use some Hollywood celebs as experts in the next report. :biggrin:
     
  11. I love irony[sup]©[/sup].
     

  12. $5.....
     

  13. debatable.
     
  14. Actually not.
     
  15. Well then prove it. Or did you just pull it out of your arse like all your other nonsense? I asked you before to find 10 bogus signatures and of course you could not. However, it is easy to find journalists passed off as scientific experts in the IPCC report.
     

  16. I qualify to sign that petition.



    Need a pretty loose definition to call me a 'scientist'.


    So, yes, it is debatable.
     
  17. Especially when the pseudoscience is documented in the very report you take as the climate Bible, lol.
     

Share This Page