|
|
|
Scientist Statement World Scientists' Warning to Humanity (1992) Some 1,700 of the world's leading scientists, including the majority of Nobel laureates in the sciences, issued this appeal in November 1992. The World Scientists' Warning to Humanity was written and spearheaded by the late Henry Kendall, former chair of UCS's board of directors. http://www.ucsusa.org/ucs/about/page.cfm?pageID=1009 From: N8KDV Only if you define "reputable scientists" as "those who believe in greenhouse warming". And in MWB's world, those are the only scientists there are. No, there are plenty of scientists producing findings that will enhance their research subsidies. Interestingly, most of the research that denies global warming can be traced to subsidies coming from yje oil industry. But, what am I thinking?! I'm trying to be rational with Steve "Better Grip on Reality" Lare. Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL Louisville, KY R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K, DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76 (remove "nojunk" to reply) |
|
From: Dan
On 17 May 2004 01:29:00 GMT, ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote: The consensus of research supports global warming. The research that doesn't is usually tied to oil companies. You figure it out. Interesting how you "know" that " The research that doesn't is usually tied to oil companies", yet you don't seem to know who is paying for the "The consensus of research supports global warming" I spent a whole year researching the topic when it was the intercollegiate debate topic. As DiverDan's earlier post pointed out, the vast majority of related scientists have agreed that the link is overwhelming. Research supporting the link comes from a variety of sources, mainly regular funding sources drawn from institutional basic research budgets. The research denying the links is primarily funded by oil companies. By the way, few of the nation's best intercollegiate debaters could defend the negative research. Wake Forest won a national championship defending the quality of the research supporting the link. When you examine all the studies, it's a fairly one-sided issue. But not if you rely on Rush Limbaugh to interpret scientific studies! Though I understand that his pharmacological research credentials are outstanding! Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL Louisville, KY R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K, DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76 (remove "nojunk" to reply) |
Michael 'I abuse drugs' Bryant wrote: From: Dan On 17 May 2004 01:29:00 GMT, ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote: The consensus of research supports global warming. The research that doesn't is usually tied to oil companies. You figure it out. Interesting how you "know" that " The research that doesn't is usually tied to oil companies", yet you don't seem to know who is paying for the "The consensus of research supports global warming" I spent a whole year researching the topic when it was the intercollegiate debate topic. As DiverDan's earlier post pointed out, the vast majority of related scientists have agreed that the link is overwhelming. Research supporting the link comes from a variety of sources, mainly regular funding sources drawn from institutional basic research budgets. The research denying the links is primarily funded by oil companies. By the way, few of the nation's best intercollegiate debaters could defend the negative research. Wake Forest won a national championship defending the quality of the research supporting the link. When you examine all the studies, it's a fairly one-sided issue. But not if you rely on Rush Limbaugh to interpret scientific studies! Though I understand that his pharmacological research credentials are outstanding! And so are yours, Fat Boy... you are a drug abuser. |
In article , John Barnard
wrote: It's not the man-made energy output that is directly causing the problem. It is the man-made greenhouse gas emissions that are the problem. CO2 emissions are causing the atmosphere to behave somewhat as a two-way mirror in that energy can still get in easily enough but re-radiation from earth back into space decreases. It doesn't take much of an increase in CO2 levels to decrease the rate of re-radiation. snip The problem is most man-made energy generates CO2 and some people who think to simplistically think the atmospheric increase is due to man. This is unproven. Also unproven is that the increase in CO2 will cause global temperatures. Earth climate is a very complex system where a change in one variable will not necessarily force the system in one direction. Just because the CO2 is going up does not mean global temperatures will rise. If you are willing to jump to conclusions like the King of Trolls has on this newsgroup then be my guest. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
In article ,
ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote: From: Dan Of course, the scientists who believe in global warming have *no* axes to grind, right? All of them are pure and true, right? Who is paying for *their* research? Why don't you tell us? Rich liberals? Yeah rick liberals like Kerry that own 3 SUVs. Oh yeah his FAMILY owns the SUVs not him. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
In article ,
ocom (Michael Bryant) wrote: From: "Stinger" Do a Nexus search. You'll see that in the 1970's that the fear was "Global Cooling." It was actually a cover story for Time magazine. And you'll see that that research was sponsored by the CIA to counter global warming scientists who were starting to emerge in the early 70's. Some of the reports even encouraged CO2 emissions to "balance out" cooling trends. Do a search on a guy named Idso. Interestingly, the latest models of greenhouse dynamics actually do predict localized cooling trends as warmer ocean temperatures disrupt traditional oceanic currents. Scientists studying greenhouse dynamics have long predicted an ice age in Europe from the disruption of the North Atlantic current. The consenus among reputable scientists on greenhouse warming is overwhelming. The only thing overwhelming is your ignorance but you are great entertainment. -- Telamon Ventura, California |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:24 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com