Excerpts below: https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/jan/2/the-overblown-and-misleading-issue-of-global-warmi/ But we should be skeptical of claims that the science of a complicated and unpredictable system is settled. Nobody argues that the temperature of the planet is not increasing in the last 120 years or so. Yes, the temperature is increasing overall. But there are a lot of questions regarding why that is. The fact that scientists who show results not aligned with the mainstream are labeled deniers is the backward mentality. We don’t live in the medieval times, when Galileo had to admit to something that he knew was wrong to save his life. Science is all about proving, not believing. In that regard, I am a skeptic not just about global warming but also about many other aspects of science. All scientists should be skeptics. Climate is too complicated to attribute its variability to one cause. We first need to understand the natural climate variability (which we clearly don’t; I can debate anybody on this issue). Only then we can assess the magnitude and reasons of climate change. Science would have never advanced if it were not for the skeptics. All model projections made for the 21st century failed to predict the slowdown of the planet’s warming despite the fact that carbon dioxide emissions kept on increasing. Science is never settled. If science were settled, then we should pack things up and go home. My research over the years is focused on climate variability and climate dynamics. It is my educated opinion that many forces have shaped global temperature variation. Human activity, the oceans, extraterrestrial forces (solar activity and cosmic rays) and other factors are all in the mix. It may very well be that human activity is the primary reason, but having no strong evidence of the actual percent effect of these three major players, I will attribute 1/3 to each one of them.
The author of the above article just retired. Below is a link to his bio: https://people.uwm.edu/aatsonis/about/ Some excerpts below: In 1985, I joined the Department of Geosciences at the University of Wisconsin -Milwaukee (UWM) as an Assistant Professor. 28 years later I am still at UWM, now as Distinguished Professor in the department of Mathematical Sciences. I currently oversee the Atmospheric Sciences program, a subdivision of the Mathematical Sciences which includes 6 other internationally recognized faculty members, and has become one of the most successful research groups at UWM. My work has focused on the study of Atmospheric Sciences, specifically in the areas of climate dynamics and global change. I was one of the first scientists to promote the application of Chaos theory and nonlinear data analysis in Atmospheric Sciences. I and my post-doctoral fellow Jim Elsner in a series of papers in the late 1980s popularized and introduced this theory to meteorologists. Our research has led to the Tsonis criterion, a method bearing our names, and two statistical tests bearing our names. The Tsonis Criterion refers to the necessary number of points required in attractor reconstructions. The Tsonis-Elsner method is a method used to distinguish low-dimensional chaos from random fractal processes, and the Elsner-Tsonis test is a statistical test designed to assess the significance of climate oscillations. In addition, we have introduced the notion of connected subsystems in the climate system. This concept is recently gaining significance in studies of climate change. In 2004 I was the first to apply the concepts of “small-world” networks to atmospheric sciences. My research in this area has led to the discovery of a new dynamical mechanism for major climate shifts, which explains all major global temperature shifts in the 20th and 21st century. I have also done significant research in the area of global change, and have published a theory about the relationship of global temperature and the frequency of El Niño.
Oh, disagreement in the scientific community? Everyone go home, don't forget to ditch evolution on your way out!
Have you ever told us the science is settled or given a like to futurecurrents when he has said the same. Have you ever told us about the supposed census. Do you realize he just told you its unscientific to believe in man made global warming because the science is not settled? Because that is what he means when he science the system is complicated and he does not believe in global warming because a scientist must be skeptical.
"All scientists should be skeptics. Climate is too complicated to attribute its variability to one cause. We first need to understand the natural climate variability (which we clearly don’t; I can debate anybody on this issue)."
No, no, no, we need to have a bunch people to make outrageous claims none of which come true, then call anyone who doubts them a bunch of names like 'denier'. Thats the way 'science' works now. The scientific method? That has long been thrown on the garbage heap a long time ago. We need phonies like Futurecurrents, who does not even comprehend the theory of MMGW, to spout bullshit.