On Feb 27, 10:49 pm, "James" wrote:
"B00ZN" wrote in message

...



"Doug Bashford" wrote in message
news:SKydnd6gLadtaVnanZ2dnUVZ_oWdnZ2d@pghconnect. com...
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!

April 19, 2002

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

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.
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. 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...

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. Thousands of
qualified scientists have signed it, and more are signing all the time.
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.

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. 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, 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. 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. 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.

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. 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?

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

The IPCC scientists number about 250. The rest are bureaucrats and
government lackeys.

James lies.


The Oregon petition now numbers about 22,000

James lies again.

and those that complain about
the joke bogus one only number a handfull s

Third lie.

o it's quite a legitimate list I
would suppose.

Then you're so dumb you'd suppose the Nigerian bank account scheme is
legitimate.

The AGW idiots still bristle at that because they won't
accept it while they praise idiots like AL Gore for presenting flawless
science. ROTFL

So why can't you find one scientific agency or group with agrees with
you? Come on, just one?