Global warming is a global fraud as is it’s prophet Gore.

Chill out with the nutty juice, man. You seem to have over-indulged. I see so much rhetoric from you nutjobs about global warming being a fraud, but not even the slightest hint of a scientific fact to back this enormous assertion.

Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it [global warming] is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

And to the denier, who ignores science, and prefers instead to focus on make-believe motives, this might look like a con job. Heaven forbid Gore’s movie not accurately represent the present! It’s not like he’s trying to warn us about FUTURE consequences or anything!

I’ll say this: I haven’t seen it. I don’t need to. I’ve based my understanding of climate science on scientific research. You claim Gore is some sort of prophet, but he’s not mine. I actually think it’s telling that deniers like you spend so much time harping on and trying to argue against a politician, rather than addressing the actual scientific evidence for anthropogenic global warming.

Where is your scientific argument? What is your most convincing argument that this is all just a big hoax? Bring it on.

So why does Lord Monkton have to be a scientist? He served as a science advisor, and can get quite a bit of information himself.

It’s simple, Teach. MBP claimed he was a scientist, but he is not. If he is not a scientist, what scientific research is he basing his opinions on? None. It’s one thing if you’re conveying information obtained through research, but Monckton just makes stuff up.

to Illustrate ‘Inconvenient Truth’
“…one of the famous shots of supposed Antarctic ice shelves in the film was actually a computer-generated image from the 2004 science fiction blockbuster “The Day After Tomorrow”

“Nobody is interested in solutions if they don’t think there’s a problem. Given that starting point, I believe it is appropriate to have an over representation of factual presentations on how dangerous it [global warming] is, as a predicate for opening up the audience to listen to what the solutions are, and how hopeful it is that we are going to solve this crisis.

William I hope I correctly applied the quote code. I.m not real familiar with it.

That’s funny, Reasic, since Gore doesn’t have a degree in Climatology, either. I notice you go simply for the personal smear, which we all know is simply excuse to dismiss information and sources that you do not like.

Teach, please pay attention. I was responding specifically to MBP’s claim that Monckton is a scientist:

He wants to present his opposition to Mr. Gore’s point of view from what I have heard, based on his solid background as a scientist, and one would presume he would present a scientific argument rather than wild claims such as UFOs are responsible for the rise in temperature we are seeing.

He clearly is not, so I was only stating fact. Gore is no scientist, but he doesn’t need to be — he has a body of scientific research on which to base his claims. I have not claimed that Gore is a scientist, nor have I been informed by him. Please tell me you understand the difference here.

That’s funny, Reasic, since Gore doesn’t have a degree in Climatology, either. I notice you go simply for the personal smear, which we all know is simply excuse to dismiss information and sources that you do not like.

Teach, please pay attention. I was responding specifically to MBP’s claim that Monckton is a scientist:

He wants to present his opposition to Mr. Gore’s point of view from what I have heard, based on his solid background as a scientist

, and one would presume he would present a scientific argument rather than wild claims such as UFOs are responsible for the rise in temperature we are seeing.

He clearly is not, so I was only stating fact. Gore is no scientist, but he doesn’t need to be — he has a body of scientific research on which to base his claims. I have not claimed that Gore is a scientist, nor have I been informed by him. Please tell me you understand the difference here.

“The role of greenhouse gases in climate change is not well understood,” the coalition said in a scientific “backgrounder” provided to lawmakers and journalists through the early 1990s, adding that “scientists differ” on the issue.

But a document filed in a federal lawsuit demonstrates that even as the coalition worked to sway opinion, its own scientific and technical experts were advising that the science backing the role of greenhouse gases in global warming could not be refuted.
Teach do you remember “Otzi” the man who died and was found in the glacier. Why do you think after 5000 years his glacier melted away to reveal him ?

Monckton is no scientist. He has a degree in journalism. He has been debunked over and over, but refuses to go away. He just finds new audiences to mesmerize with his nonsensical babbling, and scientific-sounding arguments. It’s much like what you get when you go to WUWT — sounds scientific, but it’s not.