This was an eye opener - cont.

[Ninong]

Who did The Heartland Institute survey? Do you have a list of the "scientists" who were surveyed to produce the results quoted?

Were they the same ones leading denier Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK) named in his list of 400 supposedly "prominent scientists" who supposedly "recently voiced significant objections to major aspects of the so-called 'consensus' on man-made global warming?"

That list was laughable. It contained the names of TV weathermen, economists, a bunch of non-prominent scientists and, surprisingly, even a number of people who actually believe in the consensus. One of those so-called "prominent scientists" was Weather Channel founder, John Coleman, who has a degree in journalism. He has long been an outspoken critic of climate change, calling it a scam. Since when is John Coleman a "prominent scientist?"

 

[Dingo44]

Sorry for the long list, but Ninong asked, to name a few:

Akasofu, Syun-Ichi
Founding Director
International Arctic Research Center
Archibald, David
Scientist
Armstrong, J. Scott
Professor
Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania
Avery, Dennis
Senior Fellow
The Heartland Institute
Baliunas, Sallie
Astrophysicist and Senior Scientist
George C. Marshall Institute
Ball, Timothy
Environmental Consultant and Former Climatology Professor
University of Winnipeg
Balling, Robert
Professor of Climatology
Arizona State University
Bast, Joseph
President and CEO
The Heartland Institute
Beisner, E. Calvin
National Spokesman
Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation
Bellamy, David
Botanist
The Conservation Foundation
Boehmer-Christiansen, Sonja
Reader in Geography
University of Hull
Boudreaux , Donald
Chairman, Department of Economics
George Mason University
Bourne, Alexandra (Sandy)
Senior Fellow
The Heartland Institute
Bradley, Robert
President
Institute for Energy Research
Briggs, William
Statistical Consultant
New York Methodist Hospital
Burnett, H. Sterling
Senior Fellow
National Center for Policy Analysis
Carter , Robert
Marine Geologist
James Cook University
Cerveny, Randall
Associate Professor of Geography
Arizona State University
Charles, John
President and CEO
Cascade Policy Institute
Chesser, Paul
Director
Climate Strategies Watch
Chilton, Kenneth
Director
Institute for Study of Economics and the Environment
Christy, John
Director, Earth System Science Center
University of Alabama - Huntsville
Clark, Ian
Professor of Earth Sciences
University of Ottawa
Coleman, John
Meteorologist
KUSI-TV San Diego
Conner, Ralph
Local Legislation Manager
The Heartland Institute
Cordato, Roy
Vice President for Research
John Locke Foundation
Courtney, Richard
Energy and Environment Consultant
D'Aleo, Joseph
Executive Director, Icecap.us
de Freitas, Chris
Associate Professor
University of Auckland
Dietze, Peter
Energy Advisor and Climate Modeler
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Douglass, David
Professor of Physics
University of Rochester
Driessen, Paul
Senior Fellow
Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow
Dunn, John
Policy Advisor
The Heartland Institute
Dyson, Freeman
Emeritus Professor of Physics
Institute for Advanced Studies
Ebell, Myron
Director, Energy and Global Warming Policy
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Economides, Michael
Professor, Cullen College of Engineering
University of Houston
Essenhigh, Robert
Bailey Professor of Mechanical Engineering
The Ohio State University
Essex, Christopher
Professor, Department of Applied Mathematics
University of Western Ontario
Fox, Michael
Consultant, Nuclear Energy
Gainor, Dan
Vice President
Business & Media Institute
Gerhard, Lee
Senior Scientist Emeritus
University of Kansas
Giaever, Ivar
Fellow
American Physical Society
Goklany, Indur
Visiting Fellow
American Enterprise Institute
Goldberg, Fred
Climate Analyst
Goldenberg, Stanley
Meteorologist
Hurricane Research Division/AOML/NOAA
Gordon, Robert
President
Responsible Resources
Gould, Lawrence
Professor of Physics
University of Hartford
Gray, Vincent
Expert Reviewer
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Gray, William
Emeritus Professor of Atmospheric Science
Colorado State University
Green, Kenneth
Resident Scholar
American Enterprise Institute
Green, Kesten
Senior Research Fellow
Monash University
Harris, Tom
Executive Director
International Climate Science Coalition
Hayden, Howard
Professor of Physics Emeritus
University of Connecticut
Henderson, David
Former Head, Economics and Statistics Department
Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development
Herman, Ben
Professor
University of Arizona Institute of Atmospheric Physics
Hertzmark, Donald
Adjunct Professor in Global Electricity Markets
Johns Hopkins University
Horn, Art
Meteorologist
The Art of Weather
Horner, Chris
Senior Fellow
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Idso, Craig
Founder and Chairman
Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change
Illarionov, Andrei
Senior Fellow
Cato Institute
Innis, Roy
National Chairman and CEO
Congress of Racial Equality
Itoh, Kiminori
Professor
Yokohama National University
Izrael, Yuri
Vice Chairman
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
Johnston, James
Senior Fellow
The Heartland Institute
Khandekar, Madhav
Former Research Scientist
Environment Canada
Kininmonth, William
Scientist
Australasian Climate Research
Klaus, Václav
President
Czech Republic
Labohm, Hans
Guest Teacher
Netherlands Defense Academy
Landsea, Christopher
Science and Operations Officer
National Hurricane Center
Legates, David
Climatologist and Director
Delaware Environmental Observing System
Lehr, Jay
Science Director
The Heartland Institute
Lewis, Marlo
Senior Fellow
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Linden, Henry
Professor of Energy and Power Engineering and Management
Illinois Institute of Technology
Lindzen, Richard
Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Loehle, Craig
Principal Scientist
National Council for Air and Stream Improvement
Lomborg, Bjorn
Director
Copenhagen Consensus Centre
Louw, Leon
Executive Director
Free Market Foundation
Lupo, Anthony
Associate Professor of Atmospheric Science
University of Missouri - Columbia
Maccabee, Howard
Founding President
Doctors for Disaster Preparedness
Malloy, Ken
Executive Director
Center for the Study of Carbon and Energy Markets
Martin, Jim
President
60 Plus Association
McAleer, Phelim
Director and Producer
Not Evil Just Wrong
McElhinney, Ann
Director and Producer
Not Evil Just Wrong
McKitrick, Ross
Associate Professor of Economics
University of Guelph
McShane, Owen
Chairman, Policy Panel
New Zealand Climate Science Coalition
Michel, Fred
Director, Institute of Environmental Science
Carleton University
Milloy, Steven
Portfolio Manager
Free Enterprise Action Fund
Miskolczi, Ferenc
Atmospheric Physicist
Mitra, Barun
Founder and Director
Liberty Institute
Monckton, Christopher
Chief Policy Advisor
Science and Public Policy Institute
Morano, Marc
Communications Director
Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Morris, Julian
Executive Director
International Policy Network
Murphy, Robert
Economist
Institute for Energy Research
Murray, Iain
Director of Projects and Analysis/Senior Fellow
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Myers, Todd
Environmental Director
Washington Policy Center
O'Brien, James
Professor Emeritus of Meteorology and Oceanography
The Florida State University
Okonski, Kendra
Former Environment Programme Director
International Policy Network
Patterson, R. Timothy
Professor of Geology
Carleton University
Peiser, Benny
Social Anthropologist
Pekarek, Alfred
Assistant Professor of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences
St. Cloud State University
Pielke, Roger
Professor and Fellow
Cooperative Institute for Research in the Environmental Sciences
Plimer, Ian
Professor of Mining Geology
The University of Adelaide
Posmentier, Eric
Adjunct Faculty Member
Dartmouth College
Prokoph, Andreas
Adjunct Professor, Department of Earth Sciences
University of Ottawa
Rahn, Richard
Chairman
Institute for Global Economic Growth
Reiter, Paul
Professor
Institut Pasteur
Rychlak, Ronald
Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
University of Mississippi School of Law
Schmitt, Harrison
Former NASA Astronaut and U.S. Senator
Schnare, David
Senior Fellow - Energy and the Environment
Thomas Jefferson Institute for Public Policy
Schwartz, Joel
Visiting Scholar
American Enterprise Institute
Segalstad, Tom
Associate Professor of Resource and Environmental Geology
University of Oslo
Shaviv, Nir
Professor
Racah Institute of Physics
Simmons, Daniel
Director of State Affairs
Institute for Energy Research
Singer, S. Fred
Founder and President
Science and Environmental Policy Project
Smith, Fred
President and Founder
Competitive Enterprise Institute
Solomon, Lawrence
Founder and Managing Director
Energy Probe Research Foundation
Soon, Willie
Chief Science Advisor
Science and Public Policy Institute
Southgate, Douglas
Environmental Economist, Department of Agricultural, Environmental, and Development
Ohio State University
Spencer, Roy
Principal Research Scientist
University of Alabama in Huntsville
Sununu, John
President
JHS Associates, Ltd.
Swaters, Gordon
University of Alberta
Tanton, Thomas
Fellow in Environmental Studies
Pacific Research Institute
Taylor, George
State Climatologist and Faculty Member
Oregon State University
Taylor, James
Senior Fellow
The Heartland Institute
Taylor, Mitch
Polar Bear Biologist
Lakehead University
Theon, John
Thorning, Margo
Senior Vice President and Chief Economist
American Council for Capital Formation
Tuerck, David
President
Beacon Hill Institute
Valentine, Brian
General Engineer
U.S. Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
van Kooten, G. Cornelis
Professor and Canada Research Chair
University of Victoria
Veizer, Jan
Professor
University of Ottawa
Waggoner, Paul
Distinguished Scientist
The Connecticut Agricultural Experiment Station
Watts, Anthony
Founder
SurfaceStations.org
Weber, Gerd-Rainer
Scientist
German Coal Mining Association
Winterhalter, Boris
Senior Marine Research (retired)
Geological Survey of Finland
Wojick, David
Consultant
Office of Scientific and Technical Information
Zagoni, Miklos
Physicist and Science Historian
Eotvos Lorand University (Budapest)
Zichichi, Antonino
Founder and Director
Ettore Majorana Foundation and Centre for Scientific Culture

John Coleman may not be a scientist, but he knows a hell of a lot about the climate, and he's suing Al Gore for spreading lies.

 

[Ninong]

Exxon certainly seems to be on friendly terms with The Heartland Institute. For example, Exxon gave them $85,000 for General Operating Support and $7,500 for their 19th Annual Benefit Dinner in 2003.

In 2004, Exxon contributed another $85,000 for General Operating Support and $15,000 for Climate Change Efforts in 2004.

Exxon gave another $119,000 in 2005 and $115,000 in 2006.

Obviously Exxon is a supporter of The Heartland Institute, having given them $676,500 over the past decade.

 

[Dingo44]

And the survey mentioned earlier was conducted by the National Registry of Environmental Professionals (NREP), not the Heartland institute.

 

[Dingo44]

So what if Exxon gave them money? GE and other "polluters" are giving money to the GW proponents as well, what's your point? The first claim you made about the Heartland institute was shown to be bogus and now you come back with a supposed smoking gun? And if the Heartland institute was really in the back pockets of Exxon, don't you think they'd give them way more than a measly $676,500 over the past decade? And a tiny amount of $15,000 for climate change research means they're dirty? Please. Oh, and are these amounts straight from the conspiracy link you posted earlier?

 

[Ninong]

And the survey mentioned earlier was conducted by the National Registry of Environmental Professionals (NREP), not the Heartland institute.

In November 2006, NREP published the results of a survey conducted among its membership on the issue of climate change. 793 responses were received from 47 states including Puerto Rico and Guam. Survey findings included:

82 percent think global warming is a real, measurable, climactic trend currently in effect

67 percent agree the U.S. is not doing enough to address the effects of global warming

66 percent consider the rate at which global warming may be occurring is a serious problem facing the planet

59 percent respond that current climatic activity exceeding norms calibrated by over 100 years of weather data collection can be, in large part, attributed to human activity

40 percent consider the automotive industry the most important industry to regulate in immediate public policy steps to address global warming

39 percent rate carbon emissions as a whole to be the most important human activity to regulate as part of effective public policy response to global warming

 

[Dingo44]

"A substantial number of environmental scientists and practitioners disagree with the assertion that human activity is causing or imminently will cause substantial global warming, a November 2006 survey found.

Conducted by the nonpartisan National Registry of Environmental Professionals (NREP), the survey asked 793 environmental scientists and environmental practitioners about human effects on climate variance.

According to the survey:

34 percent of environmental scientists and practitioners disagree that global warming is a serious problem facing the planet.

41 percent disagree that the planet's recent warmth "can be, in large part, attributed to human activity."

71 percent disagree that recent hurricane activity is significantly attributable to human activity.

33 percent disagree that the U.S. government is not doing enough to address global warming.

47 percent disagree that international agreements such as the Kyoto Protocol provide a solid framework for combating global climate change."

http://www.heartland.org/publicatio...bate_Not_Over_Survey_of_Scientists_Shows.html

Where did you get your info? Please post a link, I want to see why there are discrepancies between your 2006 results and my 2006/07 results. I'm serious, I want to dig deeper.

 

[billsreef]

Let's see, pay attention to reports by an organization that supports things like toxic chemical dumping and second hand smoke, or scientists that do research funded by the likes of the National Science Foundation. For my part, I'll go with the guys funded by the likes of the NSF.

 

[Ninong]

Archibald, David

Armstrong, J. Scott -- On the faculty of The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Ph.D. in Management.

Avery, Dennis -- Senior Fellow, The Heartland Institute, Director of the Center for Global Food Issues at the Hudson Institute. The Hudson Institute's financial backers include major agricultural companies (e.g. ConAgra, Cargill) and pesticide manufacturers (e.g. Monsanto, DuPont, Dow-Elanco, Sandoz, Ciba-Geigy). He is a food policy analyst. He is best known for his claim that organic food is more dangerous to eat than food produced using chemical pesticides. In a 1998 article in the Wall Street Journal he claimed the Center for Disease Control had conducted studies showing that eating an organic diet carried 8-times the risk of E. coli infection than eating a conventional diet. Despite the fact that the CDC has never conducted any such testing, the Avery article has been widely quoted. The New York Times wrote about him: "Dennis T. Avery wants organic food to go away. And he doesn't care what it takes."

Baliunas, Sallie -- Astrophysicist who blames the solar cycle for global warming. She also claimed in an appearance before a Congressional panel in 1995 that CFCs were not damaging the ozone layer. Later that same year, Paul Crutzen, Mario Molina and Frank Sherwood Rowland were awarded the Nobel Prize for Chemistry as the originators of the hypothesis that CFCs were damaging the ozone layer. Oddly enough, in 2000 Baliunas wrote an article for The Heartland Institute promoting the idea that ozone depletion rather than CO2 emissions could explain atmospheric warming. Thirteen of the authors cited by Baliunas in her work disputing climate change have refuted her interpretation of their work. Solar evidence points to human causes of climate change, a refutation of Baliunas' position.

Let's just cut to the chase:

Bast, Joseph -- President and CEO, The Heartland Institute. What a joke! The Heartland Institute is a front for Big Oil and Big Coal, nothing more. They are notoriously unethical. They are blowing $250,000 a pop on full-page ads in The Washington Post in an effort to defeat climate-change legislation.

And as for the list of scientists you quoted that was published by the Heartland Institute, I noticed a lot of people who are members of the American Enterprise Institute.

Here are a few of the scientists whose names originally appeared on that list:

"I am horrified to find my name on such a list. I have spent the last 20 years arguing the opposite."

Dr. David Sugden. Professor of Geography, University of Edinburgh


"I have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there."

Dr. Gregory Cutter, Professor, Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University



"I don't believe any of my work can be used to support any of the statements listed in the article."

Dr. Robert Whittaker, Professor of Biogeography, University of Oxford


"Please remove my name. What you have done is totally unethical!!"

Dr. Svante Bjorck, Geo Biosphere Science Centre, Lund University



"I'm outraged that they've included me as an "author" of this report. I do not share the views expressed in the summary."

Dr. John Clague, Shrum Research Professor, Department of Earth Sciences, Simon Fraser University


"I am very shocked to see my name in the list of "500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares". Because none of my research publications has ever indicated that the global warming is not as a consequence of anthropogenic greenhouse gases, I view that the inclusion of my name in such list without my permission or consensus has damaged my professional reputation as an atmospheric scientist."

Dr. Ming Cai, Associate Professor, Department of Meteorology, Florida State University.


"Just because you document natural climate variability doesn't mean anthropogenic global warming is not a threat. In fact I would venture that most on that list believe a natural cycle and anthropogenic change combined represent a greater threat."

Peter F. Almasi, PhD Candidate in Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Columbia University


"Why can't people spend their time trying to identify and evaluate the facts concerning climate change rather than trying to obscure them?"

Dr. James P. Berry, Senior Scientist, Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute


"They have taken our ice core research in Wyoming and twisted it to meet their own agenda. This is not science."

Dr. Paul F. Schuster, Hydrologist, US Geological Survey


"Please remove my name IMMEDIATELY from the following article and from the list which misrepresents my research."

Dr. Mary Alice Coffroth, Department of Geology, State University of New York at Buffalo


The "List" is getting smaller and smaller all the time. It was originally published as a list of 500 Scientists With Documented Doubts. At least 45 of those scientists released public statements expressing outrage that their names appeared on the list. Maybe we should publish a list of 500 Scientists With Documented Doubts About The Heartland Institute?

 

[ScooterTDI]

In November 2006, NREP published the results of a survey conducted among its membership on the issue of climate change. 793 responses were received from 47 states including Puerto Rico and Guam. Survey findings included:

82 percent think global warming is a real, measurable, climactic trend currently in effect

67 percent agree the U.S. is not doing enough to address the effects of global warming

66 percent consider the rate at which global warming may be occurring is a serious problem facing the planet

59 percent respond that current climatic activity exceeding norms calibrated by over 100 years of weather data collection can be, in large part, attributed to human activity

40 percent consider the automotive industry the most important industry to regulate in immediate public policy steps to address global warming

39 percent rate carbon emissions as a whole to be the most important human activity to regulate as part of effective public policy response to global warming

If this was an accurate study, doesn't it show that there is not a consensus? I am not sure what you point was in posting this. It seems to me that it is going against your position.

Scott

 

[Ninong]

Let's see, pay attention to reports by an organization that supports things like toxic chemical dumping and second hand smoke, or scientists that do research funded by the likes of the National Science Foundation. For my part, I'll go with the guys funded by the likes of the NSF.

You mean anti-intellectualism and pseudo-science don't pay dividends? OMG!

Do Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh know about this?

:lmao:

 

[Ninong]

If this was an accurate study, doesn't it show that there is not a consensus? I am not sure what you point was in posting this. It seems to me that it is going against your position.

Scott

There is never consensus in science. Was there consensus that the solar system wasn't geocentric in Galileo's time?

Science evolves. New knowledge replaces old knowledge when it proves to be more correct.

What would you estimate is the breakdown right now between those who believe that man is a major contributing factor to current climate change and those who don't? Would you agree that it is probably 10-1, or at least 5-1? I think 10-1 is more like it.

 

[Ninong]

Apparently the Nobel Prize-winning IPCC is part of a global conspiracy to destroy mankind. And Al Gore will be bringing global warming to your town sometime soon. He's in on it.

The United Nations seems to have fallen for it hook, line and sinker. They're in on it, too. It's all a plot by the dirty hippy tree-hgging environmentalists who want to destroy Big Oil and Big Coal.

Check out what the Secretary-General of the United Nations had to say in a written statement, September 2009:

The science has become more irrevocable than ever: Climate change is happening. The evidence is all around us. And unless we act, we will see catastrophic consequences including rising sea-levels, droughts and famine, and the loss of up to a third of the world's plant and animal species.

We need a new global agreement to tackle climate change, and this must be based on the soundest, most robust and up-to-date science available.

Through its overview of the latest definitive science, this Climate Change Science Compendium reaffirms the strong evidence outlined in the IPCC's 4th Assessment Report that climate change is continuing apace.

In fact, this report shows that change is accelerating at a much faster pace than was previously thought by scientists. New scientific evidence suggests important tipping points, leading to irreversible changes in major Earth systems and ecosystems, may already have been reached or even overtaken.

Climate change, more than any other challenge facing the world today, is a planetary crisis that will require strong, focused global attention.

As pressures build for an internationally agreed response, we now have a once-in-a-generation opportunity to come together and address climate change through a newly invigorated multilateralism. This will be our chance to put in place a climate change agreement that all nations can embrace -- an agreement that is equitable, balanced and comprehensive.

This Climate Change Science Compendium is a wake-up call. The time for hesitation is over. We need the world to realize, once and for all, that the time to act is now and we must work together to address this monumental challenge. This is the moral challenge of our generation.

Ban Ki-moon
Secretary-General of the United Nations
United Nations Headquarters, New York
September, 2009​

 

[Dingo44]

We can do this all day long:

"Warming fears are the worst scientific scandal in history...When people come to know what the truth is, they will feel deceived by science and scientists." - UN IPCC Japanese Scientist Dr. Kiminori Itoh, an award-winning PhD environmental physical chemist

"It is a blatant lie put forth in the media that makes it seem there is only a fringe of scientists who don't buy into anthropogenic global warming." - U.S. Atmospheric Scientist Stanley B. Goldenberg of the Hurricane Research Division of NOAA.

"When a bureaucracy's reason for existence is threatened, it typically generates new missions." Desperately Seeking Mission: Why the State Department's Gone Green --- Peter VanDoren

"CO2 is not a pollutant. In simple terms, CO2 is plant food. The green world we see around us would disappear if not for atmospheric CO2. These plants largely evolved at a time when the atmospheric CO2 concentration was many times what it is today. Indeed, numerous studies indicate the present biosphere is being invigorated by the human-induced rise of CO2. In and of itself, therefore, the increasing concentration of CO2 does not pose a toxic risk to the planet." - John R. Christy, Ph.D. Professor of Atmospheric Sciences, University of Alabama

"Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but a naturally occurring, beneficial trace gas in the atmosphere. For the past few million years, the Earth has existed in a state of relative carbon dioxide starvation compared with earlier periods. There is no empirical evidence that levels double or even triple those of today will be harmful, climatically or otherwise. As a vital element in plant photosynthesis, carbon dioxide is the basis of the planetary food chain - literally the staff of life. Its increase in the atmosphere leads mainly to the greening of the planet. To label carbon dioxide a "pollutant" is an abuse of language, logic and science." - Robert M. Carter, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental and Earth Sciences, James Cook University

"Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. On the contrary, it makes crops and forests grow faster. Economic analysis has demonstrated that more CO2 and a warmer climate will raise GNP and therefore average income. It's axiomatic that bureaucracies always want to expand their scope of operations. This is especially true of EPA, which is primarily a regulatory agency. As air and water pollution disappear as prime issues, as acid rain and stratospheric-ozone depletion fade from public view, climate change seems like the best growth area for regulators. It has the additional glamour of being international and therefore appeals to those who favor world governance over national sovereignty. Therefore, labeling carbon dioxide, the product of fossil-fuel burning, as a pollutant has a high priority for EPA as a first step in that direction." - S. Fred Singer, Ph.D. Professor Emeritus of Environmental Sciences, University of Virginia

"Carbon and CO2 (carbon dioxide) are fundamental for all life on Earth. CO2 is a colorless, odorless, non-toxic gas. CO2 is product of our breathing, and is used in numerous common applications like fire extinguishers, baking soda, carbonated drinks, life jackets, cooling agent, etc. Plants' photosynthesis consume CO2 from the air when the plants make their carbohydrates, which bring the CO2 back to the air again when the plants rot or are being burned." - Tom V. Segalstad, Ph.D. Professor of Environmental Geology, University of Oslo

"To suddenly label CO2 as a "pollutant" is a disservice to a gas that has played an enormous role in the development and sustainability of all life on this wonderful Earth. Mother Earth has clearly ruled that CO2 is not a pollutant." - Robert C. Balling Jr., Ph.D. Professor of Climatology, Arizona State University

"Many chemicals are absolutely necessary for humans to live, for instance oxygen. Just as necessary, human metabolism produces by-products that are exhaled, like carbon dioxide and water vapor. So, the production of carbon dioxide is necessary, on the most basic level, for humans to survive. The carbon dioxide that is emitted as part of a wide variety of natural processes is, in turn, necessary for vegetation to live. It turns out that most vegetation is somewhat 'starved' for carbon dioxide, as experiments have shown that a wide variety of plants grow faster, and are more drought tolerant, in the presence of doubled carbon dioxide concentrations. Fertilization of the global atmosphere with the extra CO2 that mankind's activities have emitted in the last century is believed to have helped increase agricultural productivity. In short, carbon dioxide is a natural part of our environment, necessary for life, both as 'food' and as a by-product." - Roy Spencer, Ph.D. Meteorology

"I am at a loss to understand why anyone would regard carbon dioxide as a pollutant. Carbon dioxide, a natural gas produced by human respiration, is a plant nutrient that is beneficial both for people and for the natural environment. It promotes plant growth and reforestation. Faster-growing trees mean lower housing costs for consumers and more habitat for wild species. Higher agricultural yields from carbon dioxide fertilization will result in lower food prices and will facilitate conservation by limiting the need to convert wild areas to arable land." - David Deming, Ph.D. Professor of Geology and Geophysics, University of Oklahoma

"Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant. It is a colorless, odorless trace gas that actually sustains life on this planet. Consider the simple dynamics of human energy acquisition, which occurs daily across the globe. We eat plants directly, or we consume animals that have fed upon plants, to obtain the energy we need. But where do plants get their energy? Plants produce their own energy during a process called photosynthesis, which uses sunlight to combine water and carbon dioxide into sugars for supporting overall growth and development. Hence, CO2 is the primary raw material that plants depend upon for their existence. Because plants reside beneath animals (including humans) on the food chain, their healthy existence ultimately determines our own. Carbon dioxide can hardly be labeled a pollutant, for it is the basic substrate that allows life to persist on Earth." - Keith E. Idso, Ph.D. Botany

 

[Dingo44]

Just type in "UN IPCC" into google and you'll see just what the rest of the world thinks of your infallible organization. After the first return on google, which is the official site, most entries following are articles about how the IPCC misrepresents the scientific facts they gather. You really want to trust an organization that have human rights violating countries on the heads of the committees overseeing human rights violators?

 

[jenglish]

Just type in "UN IPCC" into google and you'll see just what the rest of the world thinks of your infallible organization. After the first return on google, which is the official site, most entries following are articles about how the IPCC misrepresents the scientific facts they gather. You really want to trust an organization that have human rights violating countries on the heads of the committees overseeing human rights violators?

I didn't see many credible critiques. It certainly didn't seem like the "rest of the world" as much as a few people or organizations with an agenda to push. SO here it seems we are at an impasse in that some are viewing Heartland Institute as viable science and some viewing IPCC as viable science. Everyone can use google to find info that supports their POV. But ultimatly I trust the UN far more than I trust heartland, which even by it's website is not science, it is a organization pushing a political/.economic ideaology.

 

[Ninong]

Gallup poll question: "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?"

(Above: response to the question: "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.")

 

[Dingo44]

I didn't see many credible critiques. It certainly didn't seem like the "rest of the world" as much as a few people or organizations with an agenda to push. SO here it seems we are at an impasse in that some are viewing Heartland Institute as viable science and some viewing IPCC as viable science. Everyone can use google to find info that supports their POV. But ultimatly I trust the UN far more than I trust heartland, which even by it's website is not science, it is a organization pushing a political/.economic ideaology.

And you think the UN isn't an organization pushing a political/economic ideology?

And that chart you posted Noning is a lie because we all know that not 97% of all climate scientists agree on global warming.

 

[jenglish]

And you think the UN isn't an organization pushing a political/economic ideology?

And that chart you posted Noning is a lie because we all know that not 97% of all climate scientists agree on global warming.

The UN is not organized well enough to push a single political or economic ideology. Do I suspect the UN of having agendas? Of course, but you can't really expect people to take info from heartland on climate change with any degree of seriousness can you? They are not showing scientists on their website, but economists. Sometimes what makes economic sense and ecological sense are not going to be the same thing.

So when faced with a gallup poll you call it a lie because it doesn't fit with your view? Why do you say we KNOW there isn't agreement? I believe you are grasping at straws now.

 

[Versus]

*Grabs popcorn*


Hope you guys dont mind I am ganna watch this thread for awhile. Most of the time when I want to see sweet action like this I just open up fox news and msnbc side by side and read them.