I have no idea how many disagreed with the final report. I would imagine one could find out with enough digging. The point is your supposed "fact", of a global scientific consensus is anything but a fact.
I've posted you a list with over 19,000 scientists on it, many of which are experts in the field of climatology. On the other hand, you've posted a list of 200-300 scientist, who for the most part have had very little to do with climate modeling or work in the field.
Every time I engage in a debate regarding this issue on SI, it astonishes me to see how weak the global warming proponents argument is. Basically, it comes down to this...Well, we could be right, and since it's safer to er on the side of caution in these matters, I support radical, costly environmental measures to prevent it from spreading".
Let's examine this thought process and see where it might lead us in the future.
I believe in a theory called "Global ocean spraying". And the basis of my theory is that motorized vessels are steadily damaging the oceans by releasing gasses vapors from their engines. In order to back up my claim, I've got studies showing less fish being harvested today, whales on the brink of extinction, and people getting sicker and sicker from swimming in the ocean year after year.
I call a global summit, get a bunch of left wing one world government scientists to sign a document stating "something must be done immediately". So, protocols are set forth, and the only ones having to reduce vessel vapor trails are the industrialized countries. All other countries are exempt.
Sound familiar?? |
