scientists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_Ballmeterologists
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_K ... eorologist)
nasa scientists
http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles ... nsense.htmoceanographers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tad_Murty i can find tons of scientists who are against the idea of anthropocentric global warming. of course, it doens't matter. even if they all thought it was happening, 100% of them.
science is not a democracy. there are right answers and there are wrong answers. and even though everyone was saying "no galieleo, the universe is centered around the earth, the earth doesn't revolve around the sun" he was still right
i do not deny that local warming exists at all nor do i deny that humans have caused it. this is why temperature gauges which used to be in fields and now are in parking lots have shown temperture increases. of course they have, human development does cause local warming
what isn't shown though is data that accounts for chance correctly and has accurate predictions of global warming. not once has this ever happened. not. once.
if scientists predicting global warming will cause a 2 degree increase, it should be within that prediction of 5 percent everywhere, since it's a global prediction. if tere are local reasons as to why it wouldn't be 2 degrees +/- (.05 * 2) in a given place then they should explain that. these predictions must play out over 20 years. if you can't do it, your hypothesis was not proven and it's back to the drawing board
Americans learn only from catastrophe and not from experience. -- Theodore Roosevelt
My life has become a single, ongoing revelation that I haven’t been cynical enough.