Global Warming Today: How’s This Consensus?


Recently, Arthur Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine announced the results of an effort in which he asked scientists to sign a petition stating: “We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan, in December 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limit on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.” The petition went on to say, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the earth.”

The number of American scientists with actual degrees in science who signed this petition and are in agreement with Robinson number 31,072, with 9,021 of those scientists having Ph.D.s. If memory serves me correctly, the number used by proponents of the global warming theory was 2,000. As in 2,000 scientists made up a consensus that man-made global warming was in fact real. I always thought that was a very low number considering this is global warming we’re talking about, not United States warming.

There you have it, folks – 31,072 scientists say man-made global warming doesn’t exist. As Al Gore would say, “The debate is over.” I bet Robinson has the courage to debate Gore regarding global warming. Why doesn’t Gore have the courage to debate anybody about man-made global warming?

Perhaps some of the anthropogenic climate change believers will explain why Gore won’t debate.

In related global warming news, do the climate change models have it wrong when it comes to clouds?

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

7 Responses to “Global Warming Today: How’s This Consensus?”

  1. John Ryan says:

    Boy it is really hot here in the north east. Record high temps !!
    But of course one local observation does not indicate how the planet is doing.
    What we do know is that the sudden and dramatic increase in temps is without duplication. The rate of increase is what alarms people the most.
    9000 PHDs wow 9000 is such a big number !!
    Teach what percentage of the total number of PHds in the USA signed this online petition ?
    Teach why is it that our own National Ocean and Atmospheric Agency says that global warming global climate change is a problem ? Teach why is it that both the Pentagon and the CIA have written studies/reports on the National Security aspects of this problem ?
    Teach out of these 9000 PHDs how many were climatologists ?
    The cult of deniers has a strong hold and fascination for some.

  2. John Ryan says:

    Teach are you aware that the Arthur Robinson is a total wack job ? He believes starvation cures cancer and of course like most global warming deniers is an unabashed RON PAUL supporter, Better check out his website he also has some cool tips on surviving nuclear war. Of all the candidates currently running for President only ONE RON PAUL believes that global warming is a hoax !!

  3. Chad says:

    Yeah, because candidates for President are the ones that know the truth when it comes to global warming, but actual scientists aren’t to be listened too.

  4. manbearpig says:

    Go look up Dr. Reid Bryson, the father of modern climatology, and see what he has to say on the subject.

  5. John, I never said I didn’t believe in global warming, just anthropogenic GW as it applies to CO2.

    Did not know that about him. I will take a look.

    BTW, it is hot as hell here in Raleigh, too. That happens.

    You’re right, Chad (good to see ya!), but, remember, Anthropogenic GW is mostly political, so, scientists must be ignored! 😉

    I’ve seen some of his stuff, manbearpig. Interesting. Have you read Climate Confusion by Roy Spencer? Awesome book.

  6. John Ryan says:

    Teach Roy Spencer is pretty far off the mainstream track also. He is a member of the Heartland Institute which published the names of 500 “scientists” said to be anti global warming. At least 45 said that their names were used without permission and that they did believe in global climate change, Heartland has so far refused to remove their names. Heartland also is a champion of the smoking doesn;t cause cancer school of thought.Heartland Institute’s list of 500 scientists

    On April 29, 2008, environmental journalist Richard Littlemore revealed that a list of “500 Scientists with Documented Doubts of Man-Made Global Warming Scares”[1] included at least 45 scientists who neither knew of their inclusion as “coauthors” of the article, nor agreed with its contents.[2] Many of the scientists asked the Heartland Institute to remove their names from the list; for instance, Dr. Cutter from the Old Dominion University was reported by Littlemore as saying,

    I have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there.

    However, the Heartland Institute refused to remove any names from the list, and insisted that

    The point should be obvious: There is no scientific consensus that global warming is a crisis.[3]
    from wiki

    when you take the opinions off the internet people are bound to look up and see who they are.
    AS for what is causing the sudden rise in world temps most would agree that there are a number of causes. But the only ones that we have a good chance of controlling are the ones caused by man.
    Although i am certain that both Spencer and Robinson might also believe invokeing prayer might well be efffective.

  7. “Out of the mainstream”: liberal code phrase for “I don’t agree with what this person is saying so they shouldn’t be allowed to speak.”

Pirate's Cove