On Feb 27, 7:35 pm, "B00ZN" wrote:
"Doug Bashford" wrote in message

om...

How many GW denial "scientists" are there?
...Who deny that evasive action is prudent?
...Credentialed atmospheric scientists, or
some such related natural scientists?

At least 19,000 scientists are not falling for this AGW drivel!


A flat-out lie.

April 19, 2002

http://www.deanesmay.com/archives/000031.html


Yeah, right. You are incapable of telling the truth.

What do over 2,600 climate scientists have in common?

2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists,
oceanographers, and other environmental scientists (so far) have signed
a petition saying that global warming hysteria is pseudoscientific
baloney.

You're lying.

They've been joined by an additional 5,017 chemists,
biochemists, biologists, and other life scientists, and over 10,000
other scientists, attached to major universities and research
organizations around the world.

Lie.

Yet if you went by what "environmental"
activist groups like Greenpeace, Sierra Club, or the so-called
"Environmental News Network" tell you, you'd think this petition, and
others like it, never existed.

The Oregon Petition reads, in its entirety, as follows...


Oh wow. So did you tell the Nigerian your bank account number yet? I
mean, you obviously fall for everything you hear.

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming
agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any
other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would
harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and
damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon
dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the
foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere
and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial
scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce
many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments
of the Earth.

The petition was put together by Dr. Frederick Seitz, the former
President of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

And the NAS said he misrepresented this as coming from the NAS, which
disavowed it. So he's doubly dishonest.

Thousands of
qualified scientists have signed it,

Lie.

and more are signing all the time.

Lie.

If you're a qualified scientist or meteorologist who'd like to sign the
petition yourself, or want to see a list of all the signers, click here
to go to the web site run by the Oregon Institute of Science and
Medicine, which is sponsoring the initiative.


Yep, and next, humans rode dinosaurs!

The Oregon Petition is not the only such petition signed by scientists,
either. Over 4,000 scientists from 106 countries, including 72 Nobel
Prize winners, have signed the Heidelberg Appeal.

You are a liar.

This petition, issued
in response to the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro back in 1992, warns
against "the emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to
scientific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social
development." They further warn "the authorities in charge of our
planet's destiny against decisions which are supported by
pseudoscientific arguments or false and nonrelevant data."

The Leipzig Declaration is similar. It was signed by scientists who work
in climate research,

No it was not.

who strongly object to the lack of science
underlying the IPCC--a group whose work is usually cited as definitive
by Environmental News Network, World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, the
Sierra Club, and others pushing warnings about global warming.

It is. You are not.

The
Leipzig Declaration reads, in part: "...based on all the evidence
available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world
view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions.
For this reason, we consider the drastic emission control policies
deriving from the Kyoto conference -- lacking credible support from the
underlying science -- to be ill-advised and premature."

A similar statement was released around the same time by dozens of
climate scientists employed by government, university, and private
research organizations.

No it was not.

It attacked Kyoto and similar plans to curb
so-called "greenhouse gasses," saying, in part, that "Such policy
initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are
based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming
follows from the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action.
We do not agree."

All of these petitions and more can be found at the Science and
Environment Policy Project's web site.


Along with ones for the earth being 6000 years old?

Although you'd think much of this would be explosive news, it's gotten
scant attention from most of the news media, and very little from
so-called environmentalist groups.

Because it's a fraud! And such an obvious one, you have to be a total
moron to fall for it!

Even worse, when they do get
discussed, they are often dismissed as "right wing extremists" or "in
the pocket of big business." Yet anyone who reads the list of signers of
these petitions can see that these are scientists from major
universities around the world, not political ideologues.

Why is it that when so-called environmentalists encounter someone who
disagrees with them, they feel the need to bash people and accuse them
of political bias? Why can't you simply disagree with World Wildlife
Fund, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, or ENN without being a rabid
extremist?


Yeah, why can't you disagree that atoms exist, or that there is no
gravity?

If there is to be real discussion of the issue of global warming, it
would seem to me to first require looking at what all the available
science has to say, and what actual working scientists say about it. Too
bad so many "environmentalist" groups seem to refuse to do exactly that.

Regards

Bonzo

Get The TRUE Facts At
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html

Excellent Links At
http://www.warwickhughes.com/

"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for
anything except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree
panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the
National Academy of Sciences

"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the
only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes"
Dr. Richard Lindzen

[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen

Lloyd, I'm interested in hearing the reasoning or
evidence behind your unsuported denials. You leave
it with the bad guys winning this bout. I'm guessing
yer tired of repeating yourself, but I haven't been
paying attention lately.

Ya know what I miss? This:
====================insert on ozone hole:
Anti-environmental troll:
JM Besides I have yet to see a TRUE explanation as to how
JM the CFCs, a VERY HEAVY molecule, is transported to the
JM Stratosphere when water vapor, though much lighter is
JM BLOCKED by the Tropopause. -!-

The following is an excerpt from: OZONE DEPLETION FAQ Part
II: Chlorine and bromine in the stratosphere.

1.3) How does the composition of air change with height?
(Or, "CFC's are heavier than air - so how can they get into
the stratosphere?")

In the earth's troposphere and stratosphere, most _stable_
chemical species are well-mixed - their mixing ratios are
independent of altitude. If a species' mixing ratio
changes with altitude, some kind of physical or chemical
transformation is taking place.

That last statement may seem surprising - one might expect the
heavier molecules to dominate at lower altitudes. The mixing
ratio of Krypton (mass 84), then, would decrease with altitude,
........
====================end insert
....I miss a good FAQ.

On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Lloyd said about:
How many GW denial "scientists" are there?


On Feb 27, 7:35 pm, "B00ZN" wrote:
"Doug Bashford" wrote in message

......snip all

=======insert:

On Feb 27, 7:35 pm, "B00ZN" wrote:
"Doug Bashford" wrote in message

om...

How many GW denial "scientists" are there?
...Who deny that evasive action is prudent?
...Credentialed atmospheric scientists, or
some such related natural scientists?

At least 19,000 scientists are not falling for this AGW drivel!


A flat-out lie.

April 19, 2002

http://www.deanesmay.com/archives/000031.html


Yeah, right. You are incapable of telling the truth.

What do over 2,600 climate scientists have in common?

2,660 physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists,
oceanographers, and other environmental scientists (so far) have signed
a petition saying that global warming hysteria is pseudoscientific
baloney.

You're lying.

They've been joined by an additional 5,017 chemists,
biochemists, biologists, and other life scientists, and over 10,000
other scientists, attached to major universities and research
organizations around the world.

Lie.

Yet if you went by what "environmental"
activist groups like Greenpeace, Sierra Club, or the so-called
"Environmental News Network" tell you, you'd think this petition, and
others like it, never existed.

The Oregon Petition reads, in its entirety, as follows...


Oh wow. So did you tell the Nigerian your bank account number
yet? I
mean, you obviously fall for everything you hear.

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming
agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any
other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would
harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and
damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon
dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the
foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere
and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial
scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce
many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments
of the Earth.

The petition was put together by Dr. Frederick Seitz, the former
President of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

And the NAS said he misrepresented this as coming from the NAS,
which
disavowed it. So he's doubly dishonest.

Thousands of
qualified scientists have signed it,

Lie.

and more are signing all the time.

Lie.

If you're a qualified scientist or meteorologist who'd like to sign the
petition yourself, or want to see a list of all the signers, click here
to go to the web site run by the Oregon Institute of Science and
Medicine, which is sponsoring the initiative.


Yep, and next, humans rode dinosaurs!

The Oregon Petition is not the only such petition signed by scientists,
either. Over 4,000 scientists from 106 countries, including 72 Nobel
Prize winners, have signed the Heidelberg Appeal.

You are a liar.

This petition, issued
in response to the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro back in 1992, warns
against "the emergence of an irrational ideology which is opposed to
scientific and industrial progress and impedes economic and social
development." They further warn "the authorities in charge of our
planet's destiny against decisions which are supported by
pseudoscientific arguments or false and nonrelevant data."

The Leipzig Declaration is similar. It was signed by scientists who work
in climate research,

No it was not.

who strongly object to the lack of science
underlying the IPCC--a group whose work is usually cited as definitive
by Environmental News Network, World Wildlife Fund, Greenpeace, the
Sierra Club, and others pushing warnings about global warming.

It is. You are not.

The
Leipzig Declaration reads, in part: "...based on all the evidence
available to us, we cannot subscribe to the politically inspired world
view that envisages climate catastrophes and calls for hasty actions.
For this reason, we consider the drastic emission control policies
deriving from the Kyoto conference -- lacking credible support from the
underlying science -- to be ill-advised and premature."

A similar statement was released around the same time by dozens of
climate scientists employed by government, university, and private
research organizations.

No it was not.

It attacked Kyoto and similar plans to curb
so-called "greenhouse gasses," saying, in part, that "Such policy
initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are
based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming
follows from the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action.
We do not agree."

All of these petitions and more can be found at the Science and
Environment Policy Project's web site.


Along with ones for the earth being 6000 years old?

Although you'd think much of this would be explosive news, it's gotten
scant attention from most of the news media, and very little from
so-called environmentalist groups.

Because it's a fraud! And such an obvious one, you have to be a
total
moron to fall for it!

Even worse, when they do get
discussed, they are often dismissed as "right wing extremists" or "in
the pocket of big business." Yet anyone who reads the list of signers of
these petitions can see that these are scientists from major
universities around the world, not political ideologues.

Why is it that when so-called environmentalists encounter someone who
disagrees with them, they feel the need to bash people and accuse them
of political bias? Why can't you simply disagree with World Wildlife
Fund, Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, or ENN without being a rabid
extremist?


Yeah, why can't you disagree that atoms exist, or that there is
no
gravity?

If there is to be real discussion of the issue of global warming, it
would seem to me to first require looking at what all the available
science has to say, and what actual working scientists say about it. Too
bad so many "environmentalist" groups seem to refuse to do exactly that.

Regards

Bonzo

Get The TRUE Facts At
http://www.junkscience.com/Greenhouse/index.html

Excellent Links At
http://www.warwickhughes.com/

"...and I think future generations are not going to blame us for
anything except for being silly, for letting a few tenths of a degree
panic us"
Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the
National Academy of Sciences

"What most commentators-and many scientists-seem to miss is that the
only thing we can say with certainly about climate is that it changes"
Dr. Richard Lindzen

[most of the current alarm over climate change is based on] "inherently
untrustworthy climate models, similar to those that cannot accurately
forecast the weather a week from now." Dr. Richard Lindzen



PURE Republicanism?? It's now clear.
Six years of PURE Republicanism - BOTH houses
AND the Prez. Pure as it gets.
So?
Are you better off now than seven years ago?
Are you proud with what they have done to
America and her reputation? ...Your reputation?
....all that sleaze, lies and bribery? Proud?

If actions speak louder than rhetoric, then
name ONE good thing about Republicanism.
Just one.

Just one *real* thing.

Can't do it?
So? Your Republicanism more like a bad habit then?
Pure empty feelsgoodism?