Some related posts from Technorati and Google.
[Life, Liberty & The Pursuit of Happiness] Physicists in Hand to Hand Combat on Global Climate Change: Even if catastrophe might ensue, even the most drastic proposals to mitigate future climate change by reducing emissions of carbon dioxide would make very little difference to the climate. Even if mitigation were likely to be effective, it would do more harm than good: already millions face starvation as the dash for biofuels takes agricultural land out of essential food production: a warning that taking precautions, “just in case”, can do untold harm unless there is a sound, scientific basis for them.
[Sapere Aude] Global Warming Controversy?: The conclusions underscore the research of Naomi Oreskes, a science historian at the University of California at San Diego, who reviewed 928 abstracts of articles on global climate change published in scientific journals between 1993 and 2003 and could not find a single one that challenged the scientific consensus that human-caused global warming is real. "There have been arguments to the contrary," she wrote in a 2004 editorial in The Washington Post, "but they are not to be found in scientific literature, which is where scientific debates are properly adjudicated." The overwhelming agreement echoed the 1997 conclusions of D.
[Sportsbetting Forums | Offshore Sportsbooks & Online Sports Picks] Government stooges rally against anti-global warming documentary: Distinguished climate scientists, including former IPCC chairman Sir John Houghton, Professor Peter Cox from the UK Met Office, and Professor Brian Hoskins from Reading University, signed a letter to production company WagTV alleging that the film "misrepresented both the scientific evidence and the interpretations of researchers that have been documented in the scientific literature".
[Infowars] American Physical Society Disputes Climate Change “Myth of Consensus”: Therefore, coming to a final understanding of what is causing climate change, is not needed to understand the several points I mentioned. Or in other words, it is NOT necessary to do all the research to figure out what is behind global warming, to understand the political objectives of what is supposedly being done about it.
[He's not a pheasant plucker, but oh, the stuffy nose.] blujay_ @ 2008-07-19T20:37:00: The article claimed that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had overestimated the Earth's climate sensitivity to carbon dioxide (or how much the global average temperature will change given a certain amount of carbon .
[Infidels Are Cool] Myth of Consensus Explodes: APS Opens Global Warming Debate: Barack Hussein Obama did what any good Muslim would do. Well, at least Hussein Obama has not burned the American .
[The Hill Blog] APHA Applauds New Report on Health Impacts of Climate Change: We must take action to protect the most vulnerable among us from the health impacts of climate change. The public and private sector should come together to educate the public about the changes they can make in their lives.
[scienceblogs : Combined Feed] Global Warming, Media and Politics [A Blog Around The Clock]: So certainly we have a complicated science and certainly few people are going to understand enough of it to argue the finer points. This is true within the science as well, as few who study volcanoes and their climate effects are going to be able to argue the finer points about the role of sea ice in climate, or vice versa.
[Default Site Weblog] Global Warming Challenged by New Data and Failed Predictions: In 2007 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) concluded that more than half of the “Global warming” of the past 50 years (IPCC, 2007) had been caused by CO2 emissions from humans and that human activity would cause .
[Mano Singham's Web Journal] The propaganda machine and climate change: Promoting scepticism is a key tactic of the anti-environmental counter-movement coordinated by CTTs, designed specifically to undermine the environmental movement's efforts to legitimise its claims via science. Thus, the notion that environmental sceptics are unbiased analysts exposing the myths and scare tactics employed by those they label as practitioners of 'junk science' lacks credibility.
[The Congress Blog] American Physical Society Disputes Climate Change “Myth of Consensus”: According to Monckton, there is substantial support for his results, “in the peer-reviewed literature, most articles on climate sensitivity conclude, as I have done, that climate sensitivity must be harmlessly low.” .
[Green Blog] Pro-Coal, Australian Garnaut Climate Review Damns Coral, Australia ...: “The weight of scientific evidence tells us that Australians are facing risks of damaging climate change. The risks can be substantially reduced by strong and early action by all major economies …
Reflected tags on Technorati: Blog, Science Blogs: Blogs, Photos, Videos And More On Technorati, Science Blogs: Blogs, Photos, Videos And More On Technorati, Climate Change Skeptic: Blogs, Photos, Videos And More On Technorati, Climate Science: Blogs, Photos, Videos And More On Technorati, The Green Files
