Comments on: 32,000 scientists dissent from global-warming “consensus”

By: Al

Al — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 23:02:41 +0000

In that petition of 32 000 “Scientists” only 39 claimed to be climatologists. The Remaining PHD’s held those degrees in disciplines such as dentistry and Veterinary science.

Not to mention no actual Law suit was actually filed. This is just designed to breed doubt.

Just sayin’

By: Taxpayers repeatedly hoodwinked by unreliable Met Office « Russell Cavanagh's Finite Breaths

Thu, 31 Dec 2009 00:50:08 +0000

[...] Anglia Climate Research Unit and growing distrust of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 32,000 US scientists and 75% of the US citizens recently polled on the issue all found that AGW is basically a hoax is [...]

By: SNP believes in man made climate change

SNP believes in man made climate change — Tue, 17 Nov 2009 08:57:33 +0000

[...] [...]

By: what scientist is recently studying solar energy

what scientist is recently studying solar energy — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 02:32:39 +0000

what scientist is recently studying solar energy…

At a press conference on May 19 Arthur Robinson Ph.D. announced the release of the names of 32000 sc [...]…

By: Edwin

Edwin — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:22:12 +0000

i kno over 31000 scientists have signed this but y???Is there anyevidence for this because i kno all them object it is false but wat r the evidences????becuase i cant find them

By: Kai Jansen

Kai Jansen — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 13:01:45 +0000

It is obvious to anyone with eyes that Britain has had more rain over the last few years. Yet at some stage we were told that there was a drought, because ‘the rain fell in the wrong places’! Now one can rationalise any stupidity, but when it comes to AL GORE, please just take a good look at his face. What is it you see? Do any of you have any instincts left, which in the end is ALL we really have. “Actually, TRUSTING what you cannot touch, taste, hear, smell or see, is ulitmately how you will touch, tast, hear, smell and SEE the most.
There is this old quote: “If it smells like shit and looks like shit… it probably is shit . .
Take a good look at Gore’s face and tell me he his NOT a consummate actor, apart from being a bare-faced and unadulterated liar!
He is, what is known in the business of conning, as the fall guy, because ‘they’ allowed Bush to win the election. Why? Well both of these chaps belong to the same set of ‘clubs’ and the rules of one of these ‘clubs’ specifically states that “one member is not permitted to go up against, or do another member down when it has been decided otherwise . . ”
So this is his reward for stepping aside from becoming President of the grand ol’ USA. A hell of a reward: nobel peace prize and loads of cash rolling in from the various ‘green’ sources he is behind with NONE of the responsibilities.
I would trade, especially as the Bushes family are a bunch of cut-throat maniacs dating back before the second World War when Prescott Bush was selling to the Nazis through the Banks.
Quotes from Marco Saba, a researcher at the Italian Center for Monetary Studies and author of a critical book about banking entitled “Bankenstein” (2006)
..the war against Iraq, Afghanistan, the Balkans were to get control of the local central bank . . the Bank of Iraq is under the control of the Federal Reserve . . ..they go to make war, to fight war for the owner of the Federal Reserve, not for America . . ..they hate Iran because the owner of the central bank is the Iranian State…
.. the so-called rogue states want to maintain control of their own local currency. . (Venezuela… North Korea… Zimbawe)
..the fight of the New World Order is the fight to get control of every single central bank in the World . . .

AND what has this to do with global warming? Well just about everything as it’s the same bunch of people manipulating events. Why?
Total global power, that is obvious is it not? Destabilise the currencies especially the dollar, make people fearful, kill off billions with the supposed introduction of the Food Control measures – CODEX ALIMENTARIUS – on December 31st 2009, and it goes on and on. Mark my words, if CODEX is instituted as law, within 3 years up to 4 billion people could die of starvation, lack of nutrients(food irradiation as part of the plan which, in effect, is dead food!), and no help for the old ones with alternative nutrients and therapies of any sort no longer being legally available.
We have to realise that we’re going to have to ‘box beyond’ our speciality, whatever that may be and that: The Petro-chemical, Pharmaceutical,
Medical, Health, Transport, and so-called Green Industries are linked and walking hand-in-glove with some of the political elite, appointed by the Bankers and financial institutions, who are the money men and responsible for all war, current and past.
This is not a joke and deadly serious, as it constitutes the most cynical attack by the globalists & population-control fraternity on mankind as a whole, using food as a weapon, and money as the means.

By: Flaming Liberal

Flaming Liberal — Thu, 18 Sep 2008 06:22:39 +0000

Wow, you people really do not understand what peer review means. Would you trust a gynecologist to diagnose, car troubles. So, I am wondering why you trust a biochemist to help you bury your head in the sand.

By: consensus politics

consensus politics — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 17:11:36 +0000

consensus politics…

How does the rss feed work so I can get updated on your blog?…

By: Oliver K. Manuel

Oliver K. Manuel — Thu, 03 Jul 2008 00:48:16 +0000

The 13 June 2008 issue of Science contains encouraging indications that the nuclear physics community is about to discover the real nuclear energy source that powers the Sun and the cosmos.

On page 1476 of that issue of Science, R. Subedi and sixty-three (63) coauthors from a total of thirty-one (31) research institutions and universities report that electron beam experiments have revealed many more neutron-proton (n-p) pairs than n-n or p-p pairs in the C-12 nucleus ["Probing cold dense nuclear matter," Science 320 (13 June 2008) 1476-1478].

This finding confirms our 2001 paper showing that n-p interactions are far more attractive than n-n and p-p interactions in all known nuclei [1].

In the 2001 paper [1] and elsewhere [2-3] we noted that n-n interactions are in fact repulsive. Neutron stars are therefore highly energized stellar objects with far greater energy per nucleon than a star made of hydrogen.

Authors of the June 13, 2008 paper in Science also conclude that “This difference between the types of pairs is due to the nature of the strong force and has implications for understanding cold dense nuclear systems such as neutron stars.”

[1.] “Attraction and repulsion of nucleons: Sources of stellar energy”, Journal of Fusion Energy 19 (2001) 93-98]
http://www.omatumr.com/abstracts/jfeinterbetnuc.pdf

[2.] “The Sun is a plasma diffuser that sorts atoms by mass,” Physics of Atomic Nuclei 69 (2006) 1847-1856.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0609509v3

[3.] “On the cosmic nuclear cycle and the similarity of nuclei and stars,” Journal of Fusion Energy 25 (2006) 107-114.
http://arxiv.org/pdf/nucl-th/0511051v1

With kind regards,
Oliver K. Manuel
http://www.omatumr.edu

By: G-Man

G-Man — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 04:10:48 +0000

I am a geologist and have researched much of the global warming data available on both sides of the debate. I also have a minor in Applied Statistics and that’s the direction I want to go here. The Earth is at least 4.5 billion years old. That’s 4.5 billion years of possible temperature data (what we call the total “population”). When statisticians look at a population that is quite large, they take a random sample of the population. The sample must be sufficiently large to accurately represent a cross-section of the population. Even if I gave you 500 years of reliable temperature data (we don’t have anywhere near that much but let’s just suppose we do) that is a grossly inadequte sample when compared to the overall population (4.5 BILLION years). To make the statement that temprature data indicates global warming is akin to the following scenario. Take one eye dropper of water from a puddle in the parking lot and analyze it for every possible element or compound. Then take the result and say that you have characterized all of the surface water on the planet. It’s absurd. We do know that temperatures on our planet have been much colder and much warmer than any we have ever experienced in human history. How then can we claim that global warming is occurring? Or if it is, how can we know what’s causing it? We can no more destroy this planet than we can create it. Much less render it uninhabitable for human life.