Tuesday, May 20, 2008

30,000 Scientists: AGW Is Wrong

Some 30,000 scientists have now signed to indicate their agreement with the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine's Global Warming Review Paper, "Environmental Effects of Increased Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide". Read the report (here, as a web page) to get some highly interesting facts. This is the abstract:

A review of the research literature concerning the environmental consequences of increased levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide leads to the conclusion that increases during the 20th and early 21st centuries have produced no deleterious effects upon Earth's weather and climate. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth. Predictions of harmful climatic effects due to future increases in hydrocarbon use and minor greenhouse gases like CO2 do not conform to current experimental knowledge. The environmental effects of rapid expansion of the nuclear and hydrocarbon energy industries are discussed.

Posted by qwer at 4:39 PM

Labels: , ,

4 comments:

  1. daddyquatroMay 21, 2008 at 4:50 AM

    But....
    The science is settled.
    We have reached that totally scientific state know as consensus.
    The whole world agrees,
    pfffftthhh... to your puny 30,000!

    ReplyDelete
  2. WayneMay 21, 2008 at 4:56 PM

    (Spoken in Epic voice):

    "The pens of the 30,000 shall prove mightier than the (political) swords of the multitudes!"

    Yeah, lame, ok, but it was something.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The MonsterMay 23, 2008 at 1:06 PM

    30,000 is a hundred times 300, and look what that small number was able to do.

    <Leonidas Voice>

    We... are... SCIENTISTS!!!!

    </Leonidas Voice>

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ed DarrellMay 27, 2008 at 7:57 AM

    You're kidding, right? Did you look at the list of "scientists?"

    George Bush qualifies by those criteria.

    ReplyDelete

We reserve the right to delete comments, but the failure to delete any particular comment should not be interpreted as an endorsement thereof.

In general, we expect comments to be relevant to the story, or to a prior comment that is relevant; and we expect some minimal level of civility. Defining that line is inherently subjective, so try to stay clear of insulting remarks. If you respond to a comment that is later deleted, we may take your response with it. Deleting your comment isn't a personal knock on you, so don't take it as such.

We allow a variety of ways for commenters to identify themselves; those who choose not to do so should take extra care. Absent any prior context in which they may be understood, ironic comments may be misinterpreted. Once you've earned a reputation for contributing to a conversation, we are likely to be more tolerant in those gray areas, as we'll understand where you're coming from.

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)