Actually, while I'm on that topic Mez -
I can show you proper, peer-reviewed studies like this one
there is a 97% consensus amongst ACTUAL climate scientists on man made global warming.
Here's a different one
that comes up with the exact same figure.
Plus those studies also find that, as the level of climate-specific expertise amongst scientists goes up, so does the consensus. This means that all
the supposed "skepticism" and dissension amongst the ranks you're getting so excited about is actually coming from pseudo-experts and people who
actually have no place in the debate to begin with.
And that idea is completely reinforced when you start posting stuff like the "32,000 scientists who disagree with man made global warming" petition.
Do you know that by their standards of what constitutes a scientist (all you need is a B.Sc) --> that means I'm
a scientist (yay!). Besides,
you don't even actually need a B.Sc. to be on their petition, all you need to do is check a box that says
you have a B.Sc.
Ah, the ole honor system. Probably explains why there are Spice Girls and characters from M*A*S*H on that 32,000 "scientist" list:
Jokers Add Fake Names To Warming Petition
And yet you guys think it's perfectly credible to accuse all proper, peer-reviewed, mainstream science of being involved in some massive worldwide
plot - and then use tinfoil nonsense like this as your proof, and expect to be taken seriously.
Likewise, you want to talk about integrity and hidden agendas - then take a closer look at your own heroes of scientific skepticism. You are posting a
document from the "Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change". You know who started this fluff organization? A guy named Fred Singer. He
is one of the most notorious corporate shill scientists in the game. The man is a legend.
His sourcewatch page
has a long resume on all the work he's done on behalf of
Tobacco and Oil companies. Dude's been pimping out his "professional scientific opinion" for decades that global warming isn't real, and that
smoking doesn't cause cancer.
So yeah, good luck getting me to take the time to go through 100 memes this
weasel has put out lol. I already listed ten in that other post
that blatantly show how people like him aren't just wrong - they know exactly what they're doing - and they are pumping out these myths to FOOL
people like you into taking up their cause for them. So if you can't see the writing on the wall after the first ten then there really is no point
Meanwhile you want to convince people like me that the 97% of other climate experts are lying - then show us some proof that isn't just worthless
conjecture coming from a source that has it's own agenda, and that itself is just lying.
Because that's all you've managed to do so far, and that's all any "skeptic" I've ever met has managed to do so far. But when they get shown
are wrong and that they
are the ones being lied to, 99% of them just don't have the balls to suck it up and admit it. Hence
"skeptic" becomes denier. It's not a term we just throw around - you get to earn it