wrote in message
...
On Jan 16, 11:57 am, "DeadFrog" wrote:
wrote in message

...
On Jan 16, 10:33 am, "DeadFrog" wrote:





wrote in message

...
On Jan 14, 6:29 pm, wrote:

obzon wrote:
HOW many times have you heard or read words to the effect that 4000
scientists from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate change (IPCC)
supported the claims about a significant human influence on climate?

Usually only when I read denialist nonsense: such a claim would be an
appeal to popularity, which is a logical fallacy that scientists would
not indulge in.

In other words, whether 4000 scientists agree with something or not is
a manufactured controversy used as a red herring/strawman by the idiot
denialists.

Excellent!

My feelings exactly -- how many scientists agree
on something is irrelevant.

So are you simply putting on a pretense of
being rational about AGW, or are you actually
open-minded and rational about it?

How about discussing the facts rationally?

Here are some earlier arguments, put
together on these web pages:

http://bhanwara.blogspot.com/2008/11...-defense-again......
*****************************
true.blue.bluey - good luck finding any facts in that lot.

Not to worry, true.blue.bluey appears a true AGWer.
In other words, he is not bothered by facts and logic.
**********************************
Oh, you are priceless. Are you still denying the advances in science made
in
the last 60 years?

Denialism is your faith.

How does that work?

If I deny that CO2 can cause warming - then
that means I am denying the advances in
science made in the last 60 years, and
am denying the earth is round, and am
denying the earth moves around the sun....?
*************************************
I wouldn't put past you.