"the top tier of atmospheric sceintists."
You keep repeating this mantra without realising how much it weakens your case. The "atmospheric scientists" have become fixated on CO2 levels in the atmosphere to the exclusion of all else and then because that is an "atmospheric" effect they have highjacked the whole issue. Little does it matter to them that the higher CO2 levels may be an effect and not a cause of observed changes, so that point, so critical to their case, is constantly ignored or denied.
Atmospheric scientists have become the force they are because of their own theory of CO2 induced global warming so indeed they protect their turf with zeal. Twenty years ago theirs was a minor science attracting meagre research funds and little publicity. Now they are super stars who can influence the world!
Even if GW was occurring, and even if it was caused by increasing CO2 alone, and even if it was a solely man caused effect, and even if there were any real measures available that would cause even a token change to that effect... then such an effect wouldn't be solely the province of the "atmospheric scientist".
Why do they, the atmospheric scientists (AT), ignore or ridicule other equally qualified researchers in other fields who work on other more likely and better measured causes of climate change. Geologists have a far better grasp of past changes than ATs; the sun and solar radiation measurements are the province of astronomers, physicists and a variety of other disciplines; oceanographers know more about the currents and heat movements in the ocean, the greatest heat sink on earth; botanists, biologists and land use experts know more about how CO2 is utilized and removed from the oceans and air.
So why do atmospheric scientists and their supporters like you koan, continually belittle and denigrate other well qualified experts simply because they are not the "atmospheric scientists" who study only a small part of the overall picture and then assume that they, and they alone have the complete picture? |
