Quote:
Originally Posted by Hachima  I make a joke and you try to make it sound serious... But if you want to start here it goes.
Since when is the research and opinions of 100s of PHD level scientists from respected institutions considered "nothing of any credibility arguing the contrary?" If you think there is no one that disputes these claims you have done very little research into the subject. .: U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works :: Minority Page :. |
You can nearly count the number of actual climate scientists on that list with your fingers.
The list is largely composed of economists, TV weathermen, social scientists, and people in fields unrelated to climatology. Most of the wittings from these "experts" are things like newspaper articles and editorials in various forms of print media. The few peer reviewed studies coming from the group are mostly published in Energy and Environment, which is not an esteemed publication. It has an absurdly low scholarly circulation, it's peer review process is highly abnormal (namely: authors get to chose who edits and reviews their submissions), and it was founded for the express purpose for publishing contrarian papers on climate change. Those that have published studies in more legitimate and mainstream journals have been seriously criticized for extreme methodological shortcomings. The deniers want you to believe that their work is being supressed, but it's no different than with IDers. They are being ostracized and shunned from the climate community because they are doing crap science.
The more important point though is that no one on that list has offered any serious, legitimate, scientific dissent. A list of names, no matter how qualified, is meaningless if their position isn't justified. Most the people on that list (some of them aren't even deniers and never have been) are rehashing the same old debunked claims that the rest of the climate community moved on from years ago.
