Quote:
Originally Posted by chankya
Any of these from peer-reviewed scientific journals? I think not.
Thanks for the articles but I think I'll stick with real science for now.
Edit:
Now that I'm home and have some food inside me let me try and be a little less rude. I just mean that those are news articles and not science journals(The ones referenced for the essay were reportedly those from peer reviewed jpournals). Why would you trust them over the scientific ones?
|
I don't trust them. Any more than the ones you've posted. That's my point, I've read the IPCC reports, in fact I used to quote them to Dale ad infinitum.
When you actually look at them they're vague, make huge assumptions without validation, and exclude any number of other perfectly valid
theories on both the micro and macro level. In other words, they're a religion relying on repetitive invocation to bring them their money and power.
Yes I'm cynical, and in an era when I see drug companies fund research into 'bird flu' in Asia, then make billions from the resultant drug sale panics, I think I have every right to be.
There is just as much data, and better understood data, that correlates solar radiation as a cause of climate change as there is for anthropomorphic carbon.