It's a consensus!
If one's an opinion, and two's an agreement, and three's a crowd...
...what's over 31,000?
A consensus, maybe?
con·sen·sus
2. general agreement or concord; harmony.
Yesterday, at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) delivered a petition signed by over 31,000 scientists who reject the claims of anthropegenic global warming.
OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.
Just in time for barbecue season.
Why wasn't this in the news?
P.S. Thanks Alice.
...what's over 31,000?
A consensus, maybe?
con·sen·sus
2. general agreement or concord; harmony.
Yesterday, at the National Press Club in Washington, DC, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) delivered a petition signed by over 31,000 scientists who reject the claims of anthropegenic global warming.
OISM's Petition Project is to demonstrate that the claim of "settled science" and an overwhelming "consensus" in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong. No such consensus or settled science exists. As indicated by the petition text and signatory list, a very large number of American scientists reject this hypothesis.
Just in time for barbecue season.
Why wasn't this in the news?
P.S. Thanks Alice.
posted by John | 5:24 AM
40 Comments:
Oooops. Global warming... here today, gone tomorrow.
Interesting how such things are omitted from the news.
Nice link FJ. "Saints of the new climate religion, such as Al Gore, have stated that eight of the 10 years since 1998 are the warmest on record. Even if that were true, none has been as warm as 1998, which means the trend of the past decade has been downward, not upward."
I was sure wishing on global warming this spring.
Me too, Kelly. It's like late November weather today.
lol FJ.
That should be the lead story in every news outlet.
Hilarity abounds today as the last of the tree dwellers got all excited and agitated over a news article which in their tiny, unqualified minds seemed to indicate to them that climate change was a hoax. In typical yahoo fashion the yahoos began throwing dung at their favorite target...and missing wildly as their innate talents at boomerang slinging merely covered their own chimplike faces with feces.
Try and getting at least one thing right, lord whorfin... it's the last of the 31,000 tree dwellers!
I think Evan's troll needs to hire a new whip... the current one can't count worth a lick. Oh yeah, I almost forgot, she's a girl... with a perptually blushing big boote'
But don't mind me... I intend to continue to laugh while I can!
Say, don't this burn, ye, goddammer??!! Ya know he'll jest spend it on more of that proppygander no one is a abuyin
Gore wins $1 million prize from Israeli group Associated Press
Published: Tuesday May 20, 2008
Al Gore received a $1 million prize on Monday for his environmental work from an Israeli fund.
The Dan David Foundation awarded the former vice president its annual "present" prize for alerting the world to the crisis from the overuse of fossil fuels. It also gave prizes in "past" and "future" categories.
The Nobel laureate received the award at a ceremony at Tel Aviv University.
In his address, Gore said, "We do face a planetary emergency. The phrase sounds shrill to many, but it is unfortunately quite accurate."
Gore said 10 percent of the prize would go to young researchers and the rest to the Alliance for Climate Protection, an advocacy group he co-founded and which works to change public opinion worldwide about the urgency of the climate crisis.
Gore shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 with the United Nations panel on climate change for their environmental work. After learning of his Nobel win, Gore said he was donating half his share of the prize money to the Alliance for Climate Protection.
International businessman and philanthropist Dan David formed the foundation in 2000 with a $100 million endowment, and a year later the award was first given.
Can you believe these poor, funny people are trying to resurrect this old thing again?!! This was discredited about ten years ago with much laughter and derision...wow, what desperation:
Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine
From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search
The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war.
The OISM is located on a farm about 7 miles from the town of Cave Junction, Oregon (population 1,126). Located slightly east of Siskiyou National Forest, Cave Junction is one of several small towns nestled in the Illinois Valley, whose total population is 15,000. Best known as a gateway to the Oregon Caves National Monument, it is described by its chamber of commerce as "the commercial, service, and cultural center for a rural community of small farms, woodlots, crafts people, and families just living apart from the crowds. ... It's a place where going into the market can take time because people talk in the aisles and at the checkstands. Life is slower, so you have to be patient. You'll be part of that slowness because it is enjoyable to be neighborly." The main visitors are tourists who come to hike, backpack and fish in the area's many rivers and streams. Cave Junction is the sort of out-of-the-way location you might seek out if you were hoping to survive a nuclear war, but it is not known as a center for scientific and medical research. The OISM would be equally obscure itself, except for the role it played in 1998 in circulating a deceptive "scientists' petition" on global warming in collaboration with Frederick Seitz, a retired former president of the National Academy of Sciences.
haha...really, that's right wing science for you...they'll set up a little station in Alaska with one thermometer next, and bulletin those findings to us.
Gee, 23,000 signatures... and look at all those little PhD's after their names...
*tee hee*
Gee, and your little holy list of corrupt Republicans didn't have nearly THAT many names, did it?
*shakes head and giggles*
Alice, you're a keeper!
ohdang! 31,000 is just about two or three shy of taking a look at for most on the left...
*;]
i love alice. and her sister, berty-girl - they're a wealth of information.
Look at all these wild eyed conspiracists!!
Last year, 26 major corporations—including General Electric, Ford Motor Company, and Duke Energy—called on Congress to pass aggressive climate legislation that will help significantly reduce global warming pollution.
Every time these guys offer up a story, it does more for our side than anything we could do...look at the kind of "science" the munkis like...there's a reason no one bothered to report this major breakthrough...hahahaha...god, you almost feel sorry for them:
31,000 "Scientists" (Some Dead) Refute Global Warming E-mail
Written by Dave Loos
Tuesday, 20 May 2008
Cross-posted from Envirowonk
In keeping with the amount of virtual ink this item deserves, we're going to try and keep this short. The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine held a press conference this morning to announce that 31,000 "scientists" have signed a petition rejecting claims of human-caused global warming.
According to OISM officials, the purpose of the Petition Project is to demonstrate that "the claim of 'settled science' and an overwhelming 'consensus' in favor of the hypothesis of human-caused global warming and consequent climate damage is wrong."
So what does it take to be included among the 31,000 "experts" on the petition? Well, according to the OISM criteria, any undergraduate science degree will do just fine. Bet you never thought that BS you earned 20 years ago made you a qualified climatologist. Congratulations!
OISM also wants to let you know that 9,021 of the signers hold PhDs. They don't specify what the doctorates are in, but they repeat that figure quite a bit, as if it means something. Since the group was nice enough to list all 31,000 signers, including the dead people, let's take a look at the qualifications of three randomly-selected "climate experts."
W. Kline Bolton, M.D. is a professor of medicine and Nephrology Division Chief at the University of Virginia. Nephrology deals with the study of the function and diseases of the kidney.
Zhonggang Zeng is one of the 9,000 with a PhD. He is a professor of mathematics at Northeastern Illinois University. His most recent publication is entitled "Computing multiple roots of inexact polynomials."
Hub Hougland is a dentist in Muncie, Indiana. He was inducted into the Indiana Basketball Hall of Fame last year.
Gee, I wonder what it takes to get nominated to the UN IPCC Panel? OMG, I think that even I AM QUALIFIED. ;-)
Yeah, farmer, but you're no friend of Ted Turner. You'll never get nominated to one of his panels.
I'm confused. Don't we want them to keep believing this stuff? That's why they turned into such a ridiculed, little minority.
Oh, I don't think there's any danger of educating them, Eric...of course, you knew that.
I think we've positively identifed at least one of our trolls. But which one of you is Miss-Education?
Man...John...I go away for awhile and
LO....you are beset with trolls again.
What fun.
My favorite topic as well.
Remember a few months back when we were debating with Houstonmod? One of his chief arguments was that the UN Climate Panel had some huge number of PhD's on their side and when we began to question what those PhD's were actually IN, suddenly that was not a really important point. Now the opposition wants to promote the idea that those opposed to the UN Climate Panel all need to have PhD's in Climate Change. Funny how that sort of thing works.
Never mind that 1998 was proved to NOT be the warmest year in the last century. Never mind that there is now a "natural" cooling that should continue for the next ten years or so, in spite of the worst that capitalism can throw at the planet.
This is all beside the point.
The point of the man-made global warming is POWER. If they can convince enough people in the market place that people are responsible for global warming, then companies like Ford Motor Company, who is well known for their experience in climate science, (chock full of real SINETISTS), are going to begin to provide products that cool-aide drinkers want to buy. That is also what capitalism does.
Hey Troll Blossomy....people that have the capacity for individual thought have no desire for your sympathy or your snotty attitude. Perhaps you cannot be open minded, but let me pull out the crayons and make it as simple as I can make it.
Nobody has said that the climate is not changing. It is, and it will, and it will have nearly NOTHING TO DO with whether or not this country makes stupid decisions about our economy based on the bogus science that you are in bed with.
As your science begins to be revealed for what it is....oh yea...I guess you are not a scientist.....rephrase....as the religious faith that you have in your political objectives begins to be revealed as not based in what western civilization normally classifies as objective science, but rather in opinions that are not actually based in anything other than hypothesis, then you may have to regroup and consider that this planet has been FAR warmer in the past than it is now (without people, Ford Motor Company OR General Electric) and it has also been FAR cooler than it is now.
Now, ask yourself, should I engage in your little game and start calling you names because I do not agree with you? Maybe I can talk about things that really amuse a 12 year old, like monkey feces? That one was just hilarious. How about I attack you personally on some other totally irrelevant level? You are quite good at that, and I am sure that you giggled, at the very least.
You know something? Nobody has questioned that Al Gore has made a fortune with this global warming fiasco. In fact, I happen to know that he has tied his money up in several high dollar (capitalist) private company (money making) companies that he has been openly asking people to put their money in. Well, of COURSE he is. he is also hoping for some political clout as a result. Of COURSE he is.
In spite of the fact that the climate has not followed the models that he preached as absolute truth, he will not be deterred by so small a thing as nature doing what it will do. He has a fortune to make and a reputation to maintain, so things like a global cooling are not going to make a dent in his rhetoric. I hope that you would at least think about such a thing as this.
Ouch. That was irrefutable.
Here, Blossom, have another: (::)
Gee, I'm such a lucky girl; it looks like I'm just in time...P, you convinced me. Now, go talk to McCain, the Bush administration, every LEGITIMATE climate scientist, British Petroleum, Shell, Mobil and everyone else who actually matters. What's really funny is how all those corporations you subs were citing as entities who were going to be ruined by this are now on our side!! Hilarious...and now, the Exxon shareholders are staging a revolt to make the leadership spend even more on gw related practices. Seems everyone who actually counts is on our side...and we'd like to keep it that way and keep you people right where you are. I have no intention of debating you, nor do I have any desire to change your mind. Things are perfect as they are. We get to play the sane adults and you get to make your movement the goofy thing that it always was...the latest edition of The Flat Earth Society.
You cannot debate because you have nothing to debate with, other than ad hominem attacks.
Once again, notice that your response is couched in a personal attack rather than anything that I brought up.
If I were you I would not debate either. Never bring a head full of mush to an argument.
The facts are what they are, and you can hope for your socialist dream all that you want to. It has failed in the past and it will fail in the future. If you ask Ford Motor Company for a car, and enough people want that, then of course you are going to get a car built the way you want it if they can build it.
While the truth rumbles under your feet and you finally realize that politicians are not real scientists, but people reacting even to things like hysteria, then maybe you can rest in peace knowing that you have done your best to write to a blog that has intelligent people, and your own hysteria makes no difference whatsoever.
Oo. Ouch.
(::) (::)
(thanks Nanc)
"Now, go talk to McCain, the Bush administration...and everyone else who actually matters."
lol
Have another: (::)
As the head of Shell said the other night on Charlie Rose, that debate is over. If a flat earth guy comes up to me and says, "It really is flat, you know," I just give him the thumbs up, and say, "That's right, friend, whatever makes you happy." I mean we all know Ms. Schiavo was a happy, bright lady who had a rich experience interacting with her visitors in the hospital, don't we. No need to debate that either. Lotsa luck, guy...why should we waste any time on you over this...seriously? We WON...and you can be happy in your alternate reality...what did that vulgar Fatneck call it...circle jerk? That's just terrible of him...I'm going to have a word with that naughty boy right now...
I simply adore this part of the argument: "every LEGITIMATE climate scientist."
What in hell is THAT supposed to mean? It means what the argument always is....any climate scientist that does not swallow this wad of pabulum cannot possibly be legitimate. It does not matter what their credentials are, and we could care less if he has actual facts to present. OBEY!
Oh! But we must all here recognize the valuable and well trained opinions of the Troll Blossomed... Surely SHE has the truth while the rest of us nit-wits sit around waiting for the letters of truth fall from her lips! How dare we question that?
I know who you'll be thinking of though, Blossom.
Well, as B says, this one is over. Here's something else for you to sweat over...maybe it'll tell you why you can't like...uh...think:
“In post-World War II, a group of social scientists were very concerned or very interested to find out if what had happened in Italy and Germany under Mussolini and Hitler could occur in the United States. They initially undertook their work with a little bit of empirical study, but mostly relying on Freudian psychology. And they did conclude that there is clearly an authoritarian personality. They issued their report in a book by Adorno and others that was called “The Authoritarian Personality”.
This research has really never been totally refuted. But other social scientists were critical of it because of its Freudian basis. So they quickly began studying to see if this personality type held up based on pure empirical study, by which I mean anonymously asking people questions that would reveal their personality types, their attitudes, their dispositions, and what have you. The work on authoritarian followers showed a personality that is easily submissive to authority, be it political, religious or even parental. They submit quickly, and once they do, they become very aggressive in pushing that world view of that authority. They become submissive because they find great comfort psychologically in submitting. It helps them remove the ambiguities of life. And if they’re frightened by events, then this gives them a sense of security. And they’re typically very conventional in their lifestyle.
There are also, however, a lot of very negative traits which I’ve outlined in the book. They are very self-righteous. They are not self-critical. They have very little critical thinking about their own behavior. They are often nasty and mean-spirited. They are bullies. They are prejudiced. And the higher they test on these questionnaires and scales, the more conservative they are. You don’t find people on the left testing the same way. It’s very interesting. You cannot get even statistically significant numbers of people on the left that fall in this category of followers.
On the other side are the leaders. They are typically men whose desire in life is to dominate others and to be in charge. They are very aggressive when they do so. They are highly manipulative. They are also people who have absolutely no appreciation of equality of others. They see themselves as superior, and they are amoral in their thinking. They, too, have a host of other negative traits that are in many regards similar to the followers. It’s not a very pleasant personality type, but it is certainly there. And it has certainly been established scientifically and corroborated and confirmed, time and time again. And this is clearly the core of the conservative movement.”
So, Blossy, very simple and very stupid reasoning.
The renowned scientist, the head of SHELL Corp, says that the argument is over.
Never mind all of those so-called experts with their so-called research choose to disagree with the head of the SHELL Corporation. They must all be idiots, then? Right?
Perhaps SHELL and EXXON and other oil corporations are getting tired of being called on the carpet because these idiots in the Senate want to call them on the carpet every time the cost of gasoline goes up? Why not feed the masses what they want to hear, in spite of the fact that the price of oil has more to do with the obstructions in our own government than it does with anything else?
But I digress.
I thought the question was about what real scientists have to say about the very real situation of climate change. Again, the question is not about whether the climate is changing or not. It is.
The question is whether man has made these differences and whether or not we can do anything about it.
Questions that have not been answered are:
1. Why, 63 million years ago, were there no ice caps on the planet Earth?
2. Subsequently, before man had any impact at all, why did we have ice ages?
3. Why has there been no questioning at all of the fact that the earth is not now warming, but rather cooling?
4. What is the ideal temperature of this planet, if we can even suppose that the planet really cares?
Frankie posted that at Sayet's, as well.
“In post-World War II, a group of social scientists...relying on Freudian psychology...Adorno."
Right. Adorno and his pals. Frankfurt Schoolmen. Kool Aid mixers extraordinare.
Your drug dealers.
I hope she can sit down without wincing in pain, Phelonius.
Ah Frankie Troll....now we actually get down to a real argument.
You admit that the argument is not about science, but ideology.
Good for you, and you get a cookie for admitting that.
So, all conservatives are just bad people? We are manipulative and hateful suckers of other people's souls? Spoken like a true Marxist and I an glad to have one of you admit what you really are.
Now let me tell you what real conservatives are and where they come from. They are my ancestors and they are the ones that built this country. They fought against the English to fight the monarchy and the tyranny that came from that. They fought against the Mexican government here in Texas and established a democracy. ( I know, that is a bad word in Marxist ideology, but it is not so in mine)
These same ancestors fought in WWI and WWII against aggressors against this country. The reason that they did so was that their children deserved the same right to make their lives better by hard work and honest living that they themselves did.
I myself have wronged no person intentionally, and I teach my children to wrong no one. I unapologetically teach them the Judeo-Christian values that I was raised with because it teaches us to love our fellows and to help those in need. It teaches us self-responsibility, and it teaches us that we are responsible for the decisions that we make.
You gutless Marxist make me sick, because you teach that others are responsible for our own decisions. You teach that making an honest living is "manipulative" and hateful to the well being of others. While you sit there at your computer and talk about how terrible these conservative people are, you deny the fact that they built you the place where you sit. You deny the fact that the food that you eat and the products you enjoy were out there by conservative capitalists in the first place.
Now, how convenient it is for you to attack my ancestors (and likely some of yours) that built this country and whine about how bad conservatives are.
There is a solution.....
There are still mouth-breathing Marxists in North Korea that really need your help. They are starving. They need your input of the true Marxist message. You will have to forget eastern Europe, though, those people threw off Marxism and never looked back. Cuba, perhaps, could use a good Marxist, because they are running into a lot of trouble on their own.
Actually, I'm a free market guy...as is EVERY liberal I personally know, so, again, maybe you could start debating someone you don't have to project your asinine stereotypes onto. As for the rest of the drivel...take fighting the English...see, you conservative morons were Tories and fought against our revolution and our country as you have in every battle we've ever had -- you were pro-slave in the Civil war -- and as you continue to do today...which is why you've been so utterly repudiated by an awakening American public.
Frankie....get real.
The article that you presented is everything BUT a free market ideal.
How DARE you tell me about slavery? Give me one example where I have ever had or wanted a slave, you little puke. What you cannot come to grips with is that Marxists believe that all people that make more money than you do have gotten there dishonestly.
To accuse me of desiring slavery only tells me that you have little or no understanding of the people that make up this country. My family had no slaves, and my parents taught me about the evils of those things. You are a low-life for even bringing that accusation against me, as you do not even know me or my family. Rather than steep to your depths of stupidity, I will just tell you that freedom is foremost in our minds as it has FROM THE BEGINNING of this nation.
Oh....LOL...Frankie my dear...you just might want to look up the definition of "tory" before you use a term that you do not in the least understand.
The article is Marxist?!! Jeezus, you are a one note dipshit. No, it deals with the nature of the trog/conservative mind, birdbrain...and obviously I'm not talking about what you personally, have done but about what conservatives stand for now and have stood for in the past...slave holders, Brit loyalists ( Whigs...finally you're right about one thing...I got careless on that one),and every other sort of short sighted pighumper and traitor like you freaks are here. As for libertarians...naive simpletons who thing any moron should be able to do almost anything he wants to without oversight, not that you are one anyway. Your gw position tells me you're nothing but another right wing fool.
"The article is Marxist?!!"
The study is. You gotta watch those political drugs you take, Frankie. You never know where they come from (but I do).
"Jeezus, you are a one note dipshit."
Sticks & stones, pal.
And you're a useful idiot.
"No..."
Yes, a tool.
"...it deals with the nature of the trog/conservative mind, birdbrain..."
Through the lens of uber-Marxist Theodor Adorno of the Frankfurt School, fool.
"...and obviously I'm not talking about what you personally have done..."
I'll keep that in mind.
"...but about what conservatives stand for now and have stood for in the past..."
Conservatives like ultra-assholes Robespierre and Marat and their murderous Reign of Terror during the French Revolution?
No, wait, those guys were liberals. Nevermind.
"...slave holders, Brit loyalists ( Whigs...finally you're right about one thing...I got careless on that one)..."
Try to remember that next time MacPresident slips with Sunni/Shia.
"...and every other sort of short sighted pighumper and traitor like you freaks are here."
Gotta watch that carelessness about what comes out of your mouth, comrade:
"...and obviously I'm not talking about what you personally."
"As for libertarians...naive simpletons who thing any moron should be able to do almost anything he wants to without oversight, not that you are one anyway."
Uh-oh. I hope Phelonius didn't hear that, for your sake.
"...Your gw position tells me you're nothing but another right wing fool."
My gw position--as well as Phelonius'--has been diagrammed and itemized.
So has yours, and criticized on a point-by-point basis.
You respond by spewing insults because our positions make yours look like, well, Gore's movie *Day After Tomorrow* (which is a crock of shit, to be precise).
Why can't you just say, "You're wrong about this point, because..." or "You're not considering this thermodynamic, which..." or "You don't understand how radiative forcing works," or something constructive and, uh, educable that would make us see the errors of our paradigms?
Because you can't?
Phelonius provided a reasonable summary which outlines the justification for his skepticism.
What parts are wrong, and why?
We argue on a rational, point-by-point basis and expect the opposition--in good faith--to do the same rather than ending the argument by emotional temper tantrums and the hurling of ad hominems-- in lieu of a guillotine or firing squad.
But that's how you sleazy commies operate ever since you shot dead the Tsar and his family and buried them in unmarked graves (before massacring everyone else who knew you were full of shit).
That ends the argument pretty effectively, doesn't it, Comrade Frankie?
John, last night I pulled out the popcorn and watched the spanking that you and phelonius gave the trolls.
The trolls remind me of interacting with AI [Artificial Intelligence] characters in a game. They have been programmed to say certain things in certain situations. But when you ask something different or do something different they cannot come up with an appropriate response.
I know. They short-circuit. It's become cute and endearing to me.
An unvalidated petition who’s front man is a dead scientist formerly RJ Reynold’s chief scientific officer in the 80s and denier that tobacco smoke caused lung cancer. The same man who inspired the scientist character in Thank you for not smoking* …… that’s your main reason for denying the obvious about GW….LOL
Even if you want to believe an obscure man’s effort to deny GW and climate change There’s that little problem called facts….you know those things scientist need before they their hypothesis is taken seriously. Problem is the facts are consistent with GW and climate change.
For example to believe there is no GW such requires you to ignore these pesky facts
seven of the Earth’s eight warmest years on record have occurred since 2001, and 10 of the warmest years have occurred since 1997……….
Or that
The hottest year ever recorded was 2005 followed closely by last year (yes hotter then 1998)
Or that
human activity increase CO2 levels in atmosphere 40% (280ppm-383ppm)
Or that
global concentration of CO2 in our atmosphere today far exceeds the natural range over the last 650,000 years
Or that
This additional CO2 causes approximately 1.5 W/m2 more energy from the Sun to be absorbed. This is causing an energy imbalance in the atmosphere (otherwise known as warming)
Or that
The Greenland ice sheet melting is accelerating
Or that
Glaciers are in worldwide retreat
Or that
Arctic sea ice is retreating and has reached record lows
Or that
The oceans have measurable risen
Or that
Ocean temperature have measurable risen in the last 50 years
Oh and Never mind
that the suns irradiance has actually decreased over the last 50 years
Yes other than those and many many other pesky facts which the science is actually based on, and the vast majority of real scientist who actually use facts to formulate opinion the “petition” is right on the mark
-Neo
Post a Comment
<< Home