1. hey fc you troll clown I have provided you with thousands of scientists here is one list.. ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...tream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming And don't try this crap about them not denying it... they do deny that your side has produced the evidence. That is the side we take. We do not say we know man made co2 causes warming... we say we don't have evidence of it. That is all. 2. If Oreskes was not proven to be wrong... produce the papers showing man made co2 causes warming. There should be thousands according to you... and your side. Where are they?
here is some of oreskes... recent work... I note... that we have not even established that a little warming will be bad for the planet. I and many others suspect that because co2 is plant food and our planet's population is growing we will need a warmer wetter planet... (this is speculation but it shows how nuts oreskes is.... to state the following) http://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/09/...skes-says-climate-change-will-kill-your-pets/ Climate Craziness of the Week: Naomi Oreskes says climate change will kill your pets Anthony Watts / September 3, 2014 After reading the transcript of her radio interview, I think she’s finally had her “jumped the shark” moment. From Andrew Bolt’s report in Australia, Oreskes sounds even more off the rails than the always wrong doomer Paul Ehrlich. Bolt writes: Just how crazy are the world’s leading global warming alarmists? Tony Thomas investigatesthe strange case of Naomi Oreskes, and how the ABC’s Robyn “100 metres” Williams didn’t even blink an eye: Global warming is going to “wipe out” every Australian man, woman and child, according to Naomi Oreskes, the much-quoted Professor of the History of Science at Harvard. Revered by catastropharians the world over, she was a guest on a recent edition of Robyn Williams’ Science Show on Radio National… The glum forecast is in her latest book, The Collapse of Western Civilisation (co-author Erik Conway)… What Oreskes predicts is that some people in northern inland regions of Europe, Asia and North America, plus some mountain people in South America, will survive the killer warming. These lucky ones are able to “regroup and rebuild. The human populations of Australia and Africa, of course, were wiped out,” she says, writing from a viewpoint some 400 years into the future… But Oreskes forecasts something much worse than the death by climate for every Australian human. She prophesises the climate deaths of puppies and kittens… “The loss of pet cats and dogs garnered particular attention among wealthy Westerners, but what was anomalous in 2023 soon became the new normal. A shadow of ignorance and denial had fallen over people who considered themselves children of the Enlightenment.”… Radio National’s Williams was delighted with Oreskes’ pet-panic strategy. He chimed in, “Yes, not only because it’s an animal but it’s local. You see, one criticism of the scientists is they’re always talking about global things…And so if you are looking at your village, your animals, your fields, your park, your kids, and the scientists are talking about a small world that you know, than it makes a greater impact, doesn’t it…” Oreskes starts The Science Show by reading from her book. Be afraid: “By 2040, heatwaves and droughts were the norm… In wealthy countries, the most hurricane- and tornado-prone regions were gradually but steadily depopulated… Then, in the northern hemisphere summer of 2041, unprecedented heatwaves scorched the planet, destroying food crops around the globe. Panic ensued, with food riots in virtually every major city. Mass migration of undernourished and dehydrated individuals, coupled with explosive increases in insect populations, led to widespread outbreaks of typhus, cholera, dengue fever, yellow fever, and viral and retroviral agents never seen before… The European Union announced similar plans for voluntary northward relocation of eligible citizens from its southernmost regions to Scandinavia and the United Kingdom…” The ever-credulous Williams, instead of asking Oreskes, “Mmm, you’re smoking something good?” merely observed that all of the above is “fairly shocking”…
Still, not a single quote from a single publishing climotologist expressly denying the AGW is real. Or even something from a reputable source. LOLWUWT is NOT a reliable source of science. Yes, attack Oreskes but not the facts. The consensus is 99.9% Ad hom arguments is all the desperate deniers have these days. Wow, jem, you really are the poster boy for crazed ideologue.
I just love when the author with an obvious agenda tells the reader what someone else is saying while leaving out any context or full quotes from the person. And sheep like jem fall for it. Just lol.
you are such a lying clown read the link I provided... there are dozens there. here is the first section... by the way this is what we have been stating is the truth for years. we don't know because we don't have the science. Scientists questioning the accuracy of IPCC climate projections These scientists have said that it is not possible to project global climate accurately enough to justify the ranges projected for temperature and sea-level rise over the next century. They may not conclude specifically that the current IPCC projections are either too high or too low, but that the projections are likely to be inaccurate due to inadequacies of current global climate modeling. David Bellamy, botanist.[14][15][16][17] Judith Curry, Professor and former chair of the School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences at the Georgia Institute of Technology.[18][19][20][21] Freeman Dyson, professor emeritus of the School of Natural Sciences, Institute for Advanced Study; Fellow of the Royal Society [22][23] Steven E. Koonin, theoretical physicist and director of the Center for Urban Science and Progress at New York University[24][25] Richard Lindzen, Alfred P. Sloan emeritus professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and member of the National Academy of Sciences[26][27][28][29] Craig Loehle, ecologist and chief scientist at the National Council for Air and Stream Improvement.[30][31][32][33][34][35] Nils-Axel Mörner, retired head of the Paleogeophysics and Geodynamics Department at Stockholm University, former chairman of the INQUA Commission on Sea Level Changes and Coastal Evolution (1999–2003)[36][37] Garth Paltridge, retired chief research scientist, CSIRO Division of Atmospheric Research and retired director of the Institute of the Antarctic Cooperative Research Centre, visiting fellow Australian National University[38][39] Denis Rancourt, former professor of physics at University of Ottawa, research scientist in condensed matter physics, and in environmental and soil science[40][41][42][43] Peter Stilbs, professor of physical chemistry at Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm[44][45] Philip Stott, professor emeritus of biogeography at the University of London[46][47] Hendrik Tennekes, retired director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute [48][49] Anastasios Tsonis, distinguished professor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee[50][51] Fritz Vahrenholt, German politician and energy executive with a doctorate in chemistry[52][53]
Amazing, your lack of reading comprehension. Publishing Climatologists Expressly Denying Man made global warming/climate change
FecalCurrents, the majority of climate change hoaxsters have an agenda. Take Al Gore, the champion of the cause, who has raked in money hand over fist with the global warming fraud. Al Gore is a global warming profiteer. Just think, from the whole Clinton/Gore team of the 90s, Al Gore has actually raked in more money than the Clintons, and that is saying something.