Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 16059008)

No, 7% supported..the other almost half didn't have a clue. And of course "now" we can look back and see it was wrong, we aren't in a ice age or anything.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 16059008)

Exactly like today, other than today more money is paid to people and forced to publish whatever the 'payments' tell them.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 16059008)

You missed the point... and again, it was going away, before "man" changed anything. And now, it's been proven as a cycle, and that the estimates given in the 90's were incorrect, it was not as big or bad as they "estimated."

And even more so... when it takes 15-20 years to even see the effects "rise" to the upper atmospheres. Being so mathematically it should still be going on then... and it isn't.

Come on... pull your head out of the dark cavern.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 16059008)

"aid that they thought human activity" <-- lots of thinking..

"Approximately 5% of the respondents were climate scientists, and 8.5% of the respondents indicated that more than 50% of their peer-reviewed publications in the past 5 years have been on the subject of climate change."

Wow... all 5% and 8.5% published info on climate change (which nobody is arguing) but it doesn't say, 8.5% on man made climate change.

That's a "GREAT" bit of proof you just posted... So in reality, 3 were qualified to take the "poll."

And, more than enough links have been posted on this thread and others, that say it isn't man made.

Originally Posted by Libertine (Post 16059318)

71 total
7 predicted cooling = 9.86%
44 predicted warming = 61.97%
20 were neutral = 28.17%

I have no idea where you got the 7%, but either way, it's clear that the ones who predicted cooling were a small minority. Judging today's large majority of climate scientists by the views of a small minority some decades ago is stupid, plain and simple.



Again, it's nothing like today. Today, the theory in question isn't one only supported by a small minority. Today, the theory at hand is one supported by a large majority of scientists.



It has not been proven as merely a cycle. And, in fact, it was about 20 years ago that a start was made in reducing CFC output. Recovery was expected to start around 2010, and that estimate is turning out to be fairly accurate.

In case you feel like reading more:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/search/?keyword=ozone+layer



:eek7

Have you been drinking?

3146 respondents, all of whom were earth scientists. 79 of those 3146 both listed climate science as their area of specialization and published more than half of their papers on the topic of climate change.

I have no idea where you get the "3", but I am starting to suspect that your preferred method of doing math is smashing yourself in the head with a brick repeatedly, then randomly smashing your face into the numpad of your keyboard and seeing what shows up on your screen.

In fact, after your numerous wildly inaccurate statements ("cows produce more co2 than humans", "one volcano releases more co2 into the atmosphere in a day than humans do in a year", etc) I am now realizing that it's entirely pointless to discuss this with you. You have absolutely no idea whatsoever what you're talking about. It's as if you're just wildly quoting things you vaguely remember hearing on tv half a decade ago.

The sad thing, of course, is that that still puts you ahead of most of the other "skeptics" in this thread, most of whom more than likely failed high school science :disgust

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 16059787)

Clearly, you have no idea how statistics work.. and I just got the numbers from the pdf and the article posted. If you are confused, read them again.

Funny though.. did you read the questions in the poll? Why don't they just ask a yes/no question?

"Now, thinking specifically about the issue of global warming: Do you think most climate scientists agree that the earth has been warming in recent years, or do you think there is a lot of disagreement among climate scientists about whether the earth has been warming?"

Most Agree 25%
A Lot of Dis-agreement 39%
Unsure 9%

"Do you think most climate scientists agree that human activities, such as burning coal and oil, are a major cause of global warming, or do you think there is a lot of disagreement among climate scientists about whether human activities are a major cause?"

Most Agree 47%
A Lot of Dis-agreement 42%
Unsure 11%

47% agree... that's it.... Your "consensus" is busted. And why does the "no" answer have to be a disagreement question and an unsure?

Why are the majority of questions about "global warming" vs. "man made" global warming?

Clearly... the reason is to skew the results making the pdf, the poll, and your argument full of bullshit.

Originally Posted by TheDoc (Post 16058922)

We would have a lot more of all animals, fish, birds, etc without humans. That is without question.

I know exactly how co2 works. It's naturally produced and naturally cycled by plants, water, and dirt. Just like upper air above the oil/coal burning centers don't have higher co2 than the air over the ocean. co2 is not why LA is warmer.

It's going to get 15-20 degrees warmer, even if humans never produced a particle extra of co2.