Ah...  just since I was here and the denialists were making such pathetic attempts to dismiss 31,000 signatures.

http://www.aim.org/briefing/31000-signatures-prove-no-consensus-about-global-warming/

Robinson spoke about his petition signed by 31,000 U.S. scientists who reject the claims that “human release of greenhouse gases is damaging our climate.”  

“World temperatures fluctuate all the time,” said Robinson. “The temperature of the Earth has risen many times, far more times than carbon dioxide could drive it. There is no experimental evidence that humans are changing the environment…”

Robinson said that people need to look at the facts, and realize that “correlation does not prove causality.” 31,000 scientists agree.

Shame on you Grendel, you are very aware that Oregon Petition is a shameless fraud, and just another in the long line of Denialist lies.

I expected a higher standard of integrity from you, and that you would tror out such scurrilous propaganda yet again, after being made aware of how fraudulently that petition was organised, by misrepresenting itself to the people who did sign it, and by misrepresenting to others, who actually did sign it, and what their actual credentials are.

Do not forget to tell people to send for Robinson's invaluable self help kit for parents, on how to counter socialism in school.
You could also get the other great page turner from Robinson, his guide on how to survive nuclear war.

But far be it from me to label him a ridiculous character with bizzarre ideas and ideals, I will just provide a link to "SourceWatch", and you can read what they have to say about him, and his phony petition scam.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Oregon_Institute_of_Science_and_Medicine

I will include just one sentence from their appraisal, for those like yourself, whose browsers seem only able to link to denialist sites;

" The OISM (Oregon Institute Of Science And Medicine) would be equally obscure itself, except for the role it played in 1998 in circulating a deceptive "scientists' petition" on global warming in collaboration with Frederick Seitz, a retired former president of the National Academy of Sciences."

So if you wish to join the ranks of conspirinuts who believe that global warming is all part of an elaborate left wing plot to create a New World Order(I am sorry to say this is not an attempt at humour by myself, but what these loonies actually believe), then you can go to any denialist website and cross swords with these intellectual giants.

Be afraid, be very afraid.

The following picture is not meant to resemble any known fruitcake masquerading as a serious scientist, any similiarities are purely coincidental.

---

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=64734

More than 31,000 scientists across the U.S. – including more than 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialties – have signed a petition rejecting "global warming," the assumption that the human production of greenhouse gases is damaging Earth's climate.

"There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate," the petition states. "Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth."

The Petition Project actually was launched nearly 10 years ago, when the first few thousand signatures were assembled. Then, between 1999 and 2007, the list of signatures grew gradually without any special effort or campaign.

But now, a new effort has been conducted because of an "escalation of the claims of 'consensus,' release of the movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' by Mr. Al Gore, and related events," according to officials with the project.

"Mr. Gore's movie, asserting a 'consensus' and 'settled science' in agreement about human-caused global warming, conveyed the claims about human-caused global warming to ordinary movie goers and to public school children, to whom the film was widely distributed. Unfortunately, Mr. Gore's movie contains many very serious incorrect claims which no informed, honest scientist could endorse," said project spokesman and founder Art Robinson. Robinson, a research professor of chemistry, co-founded the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine with Linus Pauling in 1973, and later co-founded the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine. He also publishes the Access to Energy newsletter.

"In a group of more than 30,000 people, there are many individuals with names similar or identical to other signatories, or to non-signatories – real or fictional. Opponents of the petition project sometimes use this statistical fact in efforts to discredit the project. For examples, Perry Mason and Michael Fox are scientists who have signed the petition – who happen also to have names identical to fictional or real non-scientists," the website said.

AND WE ALL KNOW THAT GOOFY AND MICKEY ARE NAMES THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ADDED BY PEOPLE SHALL NOT IN AGREEMENT.  PEOPLE LIKE MUSO, SKIPPY OR MOZZA.

NO SHAME ON YOU MOZZA for being ignorant or a liar or both.  Because the petition exists and is not a fraud.  You owe TOM a big apology.

The list of scientists includes 9,021 Ph.D.s, 6,961 at the master's level, 2,240 medical doctors and 12,850 carrying a bachelor of science or equivalent academic degree.

Your problem is you believe everything the alarmists say without question.  no brain engagement at any time.

OH AND BTW MOZZ....  AND I'M TYPING THIS SLOWLY AND IN BIG LETTERS JUST FOR YOU.

THERE ARE MANY MANY MORE EMMINENT SCIENTISTS WHO HAVEN'T EVEN SIGNED THE PETITION WHO ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH IT.

BUT YOU'VE ALREADY IGNORED DENIED AND BELITTLED THEM BEFORE HAVEN'T YOU.

The Global Warming Petition Project, originally called the Oregon Petition, is a petition opposing the Kyoto protocols and similar efforts to mitigate climate change. It was organized by the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM), a non-profit organisation run by Arthur B. Robinson, between 1999 and 2001 and was circulated again beginning in late 2007. During the former period the United States was negotiating with other countries on implementation of the protocol before the Bush administration withdrew from the process in 2001.[1] Former U.S. National Academy of Sciences President Frederick Seitz wrote a cover letter endorsing the petition.

The Global Warming Petition Project, or Oregon Petition, is the third, and by far the largest, of three prominent efforts to show that a scientific consensus does not exist on the subject of global warming, following the 1992 Statement by Atmospheric Scientists on Greenhouse Warming, and the Leipzig Declaration. The petition site currently lists more than 31,000 signatories.

The text of the petition often is misrepresented. For example, until recently the petition's website stated that the petition's signatories "declare that global warming is a lie with no scientific basis whatsoever" and the British newspaper Daily Telegraph reported that the petition "denies that man is responsible for global warming."

YEAH WELL WE ALL KNOW HOW HONEST THE ALARMIST HAVE BEEN AND CONTINUE TO BE.  CLIMATEGATE ANYONE?

THE POINT THIS PETITION AND OTHERS WERE CREATED TO PROVE WAS AND IS...  THAT NO SCIENTIFIC CONCENSUS EXISTS ON THE SUBJECT AS YET.....  

BUT WE ALL KNOW THE ALARMISTS ALL LIE WHEN THEY INSIST IT DOES.  LIAR, LIAR PANTS ON FIRE MOZZA.

FEEL FREE TO AUDIT THE PETITION AND RING EVERYONE UP MOZZA...  GOOGLE DISSENT ABOUT GLOBAL WARMING OR CLIMATE CHANGE AND RING ALL THEM UP TOO.  

NO MATTER WHAT YOU DO YOU WILL FIND MANY MANY SCIENTISTS THAT DO NOT AGREE WITH YOU OR YOUR POSITION.

HENCE MOZZA...  THERE IS NO CONCENSUS.

http://tadcronn.wordpress.com/2008/06/23/global-warming-31000-scientists-revisited/

In the wake of the recent revelation that more than 31,000 scientists signed a petition circulated by Dr. Arthur Robinson, director of the Oregon Institute for Science and Medicine, stating that there is no scientific proof of global warming, liberals have been going absolutely bananas trying every excuse they can think of to make people believe that the petition is somehow bogus and Al Gore’s mythical “consensus” of 2,500 scientists is true.

The implication that these 31,000 aren’t “real” scientists. A) Yeah-huh, they are too! (Sorry to dumb that response down, but I’m addressing liberals here.) B) This survey was sent out to scientists, without an adjective, not just to “climate” scientists. It is notably easier to find “climate” scientists in your group of agenda supporters if, as in the case of the U.N., you’ve gone through the guest list and only invited “climate” scientists who you think support your agenda into the club. C) There was no requirement that in order to sign the petition, one must have specifically published research papers on global warming. But if the standard for getting involved in the global warming discussion is that one must be a “climate” scientist and have published his own research, then Al Gore better give back that Nobel prize and start refunding everyone who bought a ticket to his mockumentary.

Lindzen isn’t the only scientist to criticize the IPCC. Dr. Paul Reiter of the Pasteur Institute quit the IPCC because he and a colleague were “at loggerheads with persons who insisted on making authoritative pronouncements, although they had little or no knowledge of our specialty.”

IPCC member John Christy is also a known skeptic of the global warming orthodoxy, and has been distinguished by the honor of being publicly attacked by Al Gore for his troubles.

JunkScience.com’s Steven Milloy conducted a survey back in November of 345 U.S. scientists involved in the IPCC. From the 54 respondents to his survey, less then half believed that an increase of 1 degree Celsius in the global average temperature was undesirable. The rest said such a change was either desirable, desirable for some or too difficult to assess. About 14 percent said the ideal climate was cooler than at present. Most, 60 percent, said there was no such thing as an ideal climate!

http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/al_gore_global_warming/2008/05/19/97307.html

Despite Gore’s extravagant claims, the petition shows that no such consensus or settled science exists.

In 2001, OISM circulated what was known as the Oregon Petition, and according to Lawrence Solomon, executive director of Energy Probe and author of “The Deniers: The World-Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud,” that effort, spearheaded by Dr. Frederick Seitz, past president of the National Academy of Sciences and of Rockefeller University, gathered an astounding 17,800 signatures.

http://climaterealists.com/index.php?id=1648

The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine say they have a document signed by more than 31,000 scientists (including 9,000 PhD's) that says, " there is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other 'greenhouse gasses' is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate."

The petition represents a direct challenge to former Vice President Al Gore and his allies' contention that arrogantly claims, " an overwhelming number of scientists have determined that catastrophic manmade global warming is real and that any further debate over the science is pointless."

In other words, Gore says scientists who challenge the theory are members of the "Flat Earth Society." Based on the petition put together by the Oregon Institute, the "Flat Earth Society" has a lot of very prestigious members.

FEEL FREE TO APOLOGISE TO TOM ANYTIME YOU LIKE MOZZA.

Shame on you again Grendel.

OK, seeing you have supposedly got 31,000 scientists having signed this position, (which we both know is an absolute lie in the form of a gross misrepresentation of the truth), it should be easy for you to list say 10, yes, just 10, scientists, who specialise in climate science, that signed this position, and agree that Global Warming is a scam, as you denialist people call it.

Be forewarned, the scientists who signed this because it was misrepresented to them what the petition was actually saying, and asked for their signatures to be removed, because they were lied to, and they most certainly did not agree with the thrust of the petition as it was presented, will obviously not be allowed to be counted, even though the deceitful people at the oregon institute may have ignored their request to remove their names from it.

So seeing you have 31,000, can you find 10 on that list who have any credentials in the field of climate science to call true deniers like yourself?

Maybe you could find 1 who has actually submitted a scientific study to a recognised scientific journal or institution, which outlines testable data to validate their denialism?
Just ONE scientist of any standing in the field who has actually done the work of collecting data to support their belief will do.

I won't hold my breath.

Maybe you could get me some theological pet advice from them though, I believe many good christian vets did heed the call from the pulpits of them confederate states, to try and help put those damned uppity yankee scientists back in their place, halleluha, praise the lord and pass the BS.

mozzaok - hahhahahahah what rot.

rotflmao

It wasn't misrepresented Mozz...  you suppose they just signed a bit of blank paper and let whomever write whatever after?

many people...  not signatories disagree with you alarmists.

As for the rest of your ROT and YES it IS...   ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)

grow up pull fingers out stop shouting and stomping and engage brain.

Oh and don't forget to apologise to Tom.

Why on earth would I apologise to that (supply your own adjective to denote an extremely gullible obsessive who believes in conspirinut theories) Tom?

As for you, whenever a challenge is put to you, you run away from it like a craven denialist always will, because they have no othe choice, it is impossible to defend the indefensible.

So, if you feel that is unfair, then just list the 10 best people you can find from your phoney petition, and let us examine their credentials, and arguments that gives you such confidence in their opinions.

You won't of course will you kenny?

"Everyone considered him, the ...... of the county"

Sprintcyclist wrote on Dec 10^th, 2009 at 10:53pm:

mozzaok - hahhahahahah what rot.

You would do well to stay out of this one sprint, because be honest, you could write what you know about this issue on the back of a postage stamp with a crayon.
You merely attach yourself to the denialist argument because you think that is what a classic right winger should do.

As for you mozzaok when an argument is brought to you, you have a raging rant because you cant comprehend a debate.

Grendel has not backed down or run away from any debate, he has defended his arguments and got the better of you.  

When a challenge is put to you, you rage at it like a craven religous obsessed gullable nut, because you have no other choice, to defend the indefensible.

'Phoney petition', their credentials are 9,000 Ph.D.s in fields such as atmospheric science, climatology, Earth science, environment and dozens of other specialtie.

You're calling me a conspiracy theorist again.  These arn't my claims.  They are saying this at Copenhagen.  The Copenhagen treaty says this.  Here it is and have a read through.

http://www.globalclimatescam.com/documents/un-fccc-copenhagen-2009.pdf

This scam from more than a decade ago, that was exposed as such more than a decade ago, and relegated to the ignominy it deserved a decade ago, may be news to you, because you only get your daily dose of nutty goodness from your various conspirinut sites, but to anyone with even the vaguest understanding of the "Debate", as you put it, would already know that.

Now the fact that the last little piggy went wee, wee , wee home, when after trumpeting the credentials of 31,000 significant scientific opinions, could not even provide 10, whose credentials, and opinions we could actually examine.

You see the real scientists explain their work, (yes they actually do work), they collect data, perform experiments, test theories, etc.
Meanwhile your brave band of imaginary friends have provided just what contribution to the knowledge base?

Grendel was not up to verifying his false claims about the credentials of this fake petition group, do you think you could do any better?

Give it a go, find 10 who have added anything relevant to our understanding of Climate Change.

You really need to check out the refutation of all the Denialist schtick, it has been done to death, which was why I berated Grendels integrity at the start, because he was provided with all the information about this scam many moons ago, but like all denialist goons, he just keeps repasting debunked lies over and over, to impress the dull and the lazy, who know no better.

Fair dinkum I do declare that Denialists are the hemorrhoids of the internet.

I'm sorry but you don't have fingers in your ears at all do you?  Your head must be stuck up your ar5e.
How many times do people have to tell you?

This petition that Tom cited was presented to the US government.

Oh dear imagine that.  Well known people presenting a fraudulent petition to a government who have the means to check every signature on it.

The only people calling it a fraud are the alarmists and we know from Climategate that this is just part of the recommended tactics to silence dissent.  Seems it has worked in your case.

Yes the scientists that signed the petition work too Mozza.

Do get a life and stop being such a bigoted believer in a pseudo-religion.

As for haemorrhoids...  you must have them on the brain.  that must hurt.

LOL I never run away you liar...
and there are many many people on the NET who will back that up.

If you don't read the links don't be a lying hypocrite.

Oh and why do I have to do all the work for you.  I've provided hundreds of links and names...  yet another of your lies.

You like your mate Muso dismiss anyone ...  out-of-hand regardless of their standing...  who aren't lemmings like yourselves.

how's the Emperor Mozza...  naked yet?  ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Grendel wrote on Dec 10^th, 2009 at 5:40pm:

Ah...  just since I was here and the denialists were making such pathetic attempts to dismiss 31,000 signatures. http://www.aim.org/briefing/31000-signatures-prove-no-consensus-about-global-warming/ Robinson spoke about his petition signed by 31,000 U.S. scientists who reject the claims that “human release of greenhouse gases is damaging our climate.”   “World temperatures fluctuate all the time,” said Robinson. “The temperature of the Earth has risen many times, far more times than carbon dioxide could drive it. There is no experimental evidence that humans are changing the environment…” Robinson said that people need to look at the facts, and realize that “correlation does not prove causality.” 31,000 scientists agree.

What boofy fails to mention is that list has been proven to have the names of dead people, accountants and even a porn star. Good list boof.

Oh dear Mozz factually wrong again...

Updated campaign

In October 2007 a number of individuals reported receiving a package of materials closely similar to the original Oregon Petition mailing.[24] As with the earlier version, it contained a six-paragraph covering note from Frederick Seitz along with a reply card and a supporting article. The text of the position, which as before is on the reply card, is identical to the previous petition. Below the text is a signature line, a set of tick boxes for the signatory to state their academic degree (B.S., M.S., Ph.D.) and field, and another tick box stating "Please send more petition cards for me to distribute." This renewed distribution has continued until at least February 2008.

YES MOZZ IT SEEMS ALL SIGNATORIES DO KNOW WHAT THEY ARE SIGNING AND THAT THE PETITION WAS RECENTLY (NOT 10 YEARS AGO) OPEN TO NEW SIGNATURES.  ONE MORE STRIKE AND YOU ARE OUT!!!!!!  AGAIN.....  ::) ::) ::)

WELL WELL WELL  STILL CANT GET MY NAME RIGHT EH SQUIPPY...  THE GREAT GOD MUSO WILL BE ONTO YOU OR CONTINUE TO BE A HYPOCRITE.  I'M BETTING ON THE LATTER.

WHICH NAME DID YOU SIGN IN AS?  A PORN STAR?  

THE POINT LOST ON YOU APPARENTLY IS THAT PEOPLE LIKE YOURSELF HAVE TRIED TO INVALIDATE THE PETITION BY DOING JUST THAT AND EVEN SO THERE HAVE BEEN VERY FEW SUCH INSTANCES.

I KNOW IF YOU BELIEVED IN THE PETITION YOU'D BE CRAPPING ON ENDLESSLY AND RUDELY HOW 3 DUD SIGNATURES IN NO WAY INVALIDATES 31000 SIGNATURES. ;D ;D ;D

HYPOCRITE!

MOZZA'S 3RD STRIKE...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_scientists_opposing_the_mainstream_scientific_assessment_of_global_warming

AND THERE ARE MANY, MANY MORE

[quoteI KNOW IF YOU BELIEVED IN THE PETITION YOU'D BE CRAPPING ON ENDLESSLY AND RUDELY HOW 3 DUD SIGNATURES IN NO WAY INVALIDATES 31000 SIGNATURES][/quote]

There's more than three dud signatures boofy, there's 31000 duds there old chum.

LOL
PROOF DENIALISTS ARE BEYOND REASONED DEBATE.

WELL DONE SKIPPY  :D

lmao, So it is not the original Oregon Petition that was absolutely, and totally rejected as a mischievous fraud from 10 years ago, it is the new one from 2 yeaars ago, and just coincidentally, it happened to get exactly the same amount of signatures?

Brilliant work, totally trustworthy source, no doubt. ;)

But if I may be serious for a moment, is getting 31,000 signatures of a varied group of people whose credentials are having any degree, or diploma, in any field,  is what 'REALLY' convinces you that the lies it is attached to are valid?

Does that mean if I collect 32,000 signatures from lawyers, doctor's vet's, accountants, etc which states man does significantly contribute to Global Warming, then you will accept that as valid evidence to support the case, and thereby switch to accepting the truth which the scientists have provided, but which you currently ignore?

I mean, you are the one proposing that this dubious document negates the combined work of thousands of scientists, and the collective opinion of millions or possibly billions, of people who do accept that mankind's actions are impacting on Climate Change, so could you let us in on what weight you apply to the opinions of these supposed 31,000, that you can expect us to believe that their 'supposed' opinions invalidate all other professional studies and evidence that is contradictory to their "opinion"?

All you have to do to convince me Mozz is get the scientific community to agree and for once and for all provide absolute proof that man-made CO2 emmissions are creating catastrophic global warming.

You make the claim...  but NO PROOF HAS EVER BEEN CITED...  ANYWHERE.

Even the organisations you cite that believe....  say it is LIKELY that MMCO2 is the cause of global warming.

LIKELY...  hmmm.... seems they aren't sure eh Mozz?

Keep on denying...  merry xmas.

Yes, It's the same old sad Oregon petition.

The figure of 9000  PhD's is incorrect. It's blogosphere hype. A significant proportion of the signatories are actually dead too:)

You could also get a 50% discount for the Washington denialist conference if you signed the petition. No checks on identity of qualifications needed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9mgT-xJNFA

There you go Mozz...  absolution from the great God of denialism himself.

His word is law....   :D ;D :D ;D :D ;D :D ::)


ROTFLMAO

How does it feel to be strung along by deliberate propaganda?

Which group do you think are most likely to be able to fund a mass brainwashing campaign?  The Energy companies or the Renewable Energy sector?

Grendel, I suggest that you at least go to the trouble of looking up the Oregon Petition on Wikipedia before you hold yourself out as such an expert on it. Whilst there, see if you can find out how many of these "scientists" are pharmacists, GPs, civil engineers etc. Also, see if you can count the Greenpeace activists who have signed it to prove that you don't need t be a scientist at all to get your name on it. But never mind, you're the last in long, long list of people who have embarrassed themselves by quoting the Oregon petition.

It seems you haven't learned much since the days that you assured us that David Hicks was going to wreak havoc within hours of his release. Still waiting on that one, too.

Paella wrote on Dec 21^st, 2009 at 5:50pm:

Grendel, I suggest that you at least go to the trouble of looking up the Oregon Petition on Wikipedia before you hold yourself out as such an expert on it. Whilst there, see if you can find out how many of these "scientists" are pharmacists, GPs, civil engineers etc. Also, see if you can count the Greenpeace activists who have signed it to prove that you don't need t be a scientist at all to get your name on it. But never mind, you're the last in long, long list of people who have embarrassed themselves by quoting the Oregon petition.

On the subject of Wikipedia it would appear that it is not an impartial observer on this issue:

How Wikipedia’s green doctor rewrote 5,428 climate articles

By Lawrence Solomon

T he Climategate Emails describe how a small band of climatologists cooked the books to make the last century seem dangerously warm.

The emails also describe how the band plotted to rewrite history as well as science, particularly by eliminating the Medieval Warm Period, a 400 year period that began around 1000 AD.

The Climategate Emails reveal something else, too: the enlistment of the most widely read source of information in the world — Wikipedia — in the wholesale rewriting of this history.

The Medieval Warm Period, which followed the meanness and cold of the Dark Ages, was a great time in human history — it allowed humans around the world to bask in a glorious warmth that vastly improved agriculture, increased life spans and otherwise bettered the human condition.

But the Medieval Warm Period was not so great for some humans in our own time — the same small band that believes the planet has now entered an unprecedented and dangerous warm period. As we now know from the Climategate Emails, this band saw the Medieval Warm Period as an enormous obstacle in their mission of spreading the word about global warming. If temperatures were warmer 1,000 years ago than today, the Climategate Emails explain in detail, their message that we now live in the warmest of all possible times would be undermined. As put by one band member, a Briton named Folland at the Hadley Centre, a Medieval Warm Period “dilutes the message rather significantly.”

Even before the Climategate Emails came to light, the problem posed by the Medieval Warm Period to this band was known. “We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period” read a pre-Climategate email, circa 1995, as attested to at hearings of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works. But the Climategate transcripts were more extensive and more illuminating — they provided an unvarnished look at the struggles that the climate practitioners underwent before settling on their scientific dogma.

The Climategate Emails showed, for example, that some members of the band were uncomfortable with aspects of their work, some even questioning the need to erase the existence of the Medieval Warm Period 1,000 years earlier.

Said Briffa, one of their chief practitioners: “I know there is pressure to present a nice tidy story as regards ‘apparent unprecedented warming in a thousand years or more in the proxy data’ but in reality the situation is not quite so simple. … I believe that the recent warmth was probably matched about 1,000 years ago.”  

In the end, Briffa and other members of the band overcame their doubts and settled on their dogma. With the help of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the highest climate change authority of all, they published what became the icon of their movement — the hockey stick graph. This icon showed temperatures in the last 1,000 years to have been stable — no Medieval Warm Period, not even the Little Ice Age of a few centuries ago.

But the UN’s official verdict that the Medieval Warm Period had not existed did not erase the countless schoolbooks, encyclopedias, and other scholarly sources that claimed it had. Rewriting those would take decades, time that the band members didn’t have if they were to save the globe from warming.

Instead, the band members turned to their friends in the media and to the blogosphere, creating a website called RealClimate.org. “The idea is that we working climate scientists should have a place where we can mount a rapid response to supposedly ‘bombshell’ papers that are doing the rounds” in aid of “combating dis-information,” one email explained, referring to criticisms of the hockey stick and anything else suggesting that temperatures today were not the hottest in recorded time. One person in the nine-member Realclimate.org team — U.K. scientist and Green Party activist William Connolley — would take on particularly crucial duties.

Connolley took control of all things climate in the most used information source the world has ever known – Wikipedia. Starting in February 2003, just when opposition to the claims of the band members were beginning to gel, Connolley set to work on the Wikipedia site. He rewrote Wikipedia’s articles on global warming, on the greenhouse effect, on the instrumental temperature record, on the urban heat island, on climate models, on global cooling. On Feb. 14, he began to erase the Little Ice Age; on Aug.11, the Medieval Warm Period. In October, he turned his attention to the hockey stick graph. He rewrote articles on the politics of global warming and on the scientists who were skeptical of the band.

Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer, two of the world’s most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by others that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period.

All told, Connolley created or rewrote 5,428 unique Wikipedia articles. His control over Wikipedia was greater still, however, through the role he obtained at Wikipedia as a website administrator, which allowed him to act with virtual impunity. When Connolley didn’t like the subject of a certain article, he removed it — more than 500 articles of various descriptions disappeared at his hand. When he disapproved of the arguments that others were making, he often had them barred — over 2,000 Wikipedia contributors who ran afoul of him found themselves blocked from making further contributions. Acolytes whose writing conformed to Connolley’s global warming views, in contrast, were rewarded with Wikipedia’s blessings. In these ways, Connolley turned Wikipedia into the missionary wing of the global warming movement.

The Medieval Warm Period disappeared, as did criticism of the global warming orthodoxy. With the release of the Climategate Emails, the disappearing trick has been exposed. The glorious Medieval Warm Period will remain in the history books, perhaps with an asterisk to describe how a band of zealots once tried to make it disappear.


Read more: http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/12/19/lawrence-solomon-wikipedia-s-climate-doctor.aspx#ixzz0aJROZ7dS
The Financial Post is now on Facebook. Join our fan community today.

Blahh, more denialist garbage.
Go back to claiming 9/11 was an inside job, or that AIDS is a big con, or that vaccinations cause autism, or sids, or whatever spurious claim you want.
We know there are scientists who agree with all of those things, they have a name;
"Ratbags"

mozzoak you're responses are just infuriating.  Are you here just to crush any argument you don't like with your idiotic ranting?  Stop trying to intimidate other members of this forum.

Actually prove them wrong for once?  Can you manage it?  So far you havn't come close so it might take a little work.

I agree Wikipedia is no credible authority on the issue. Wikipedia is no credible authority for anything. My point is that Grendel did not even bother to attempt any sort of Cursory check, even a Wikipedia check, before getting sucked in by the Oregon petition. Grendel is usually quite fond of quoting wikipedia as an authority.

By the way, during the so called "medieval warming period", which I personally believe, assuming the data is accurate, WAS probably something MORE than a normal statistical variation, it was a lot cooler than it is now.

But please don't bother debating me on this. I do not debate evolution with born again Christians, I do not debate whether smoking causes lung cancer with tobacco lobbyists, and I don't debate global warming with climate change skeptics.  

pjb05 wrote on Dec 21^st, 2009 at 7:08pm:

Richard Lindzen and Fred Singer, two of the world’s most distinguished climate scientists, were among his early targets, followed by others that the band especially hated, such as Willie Soon and Sallie Baliunas of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, authorities on the Medieval Warm Period.

Distinguished?

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Sorry, but I'm not going to waste my time on debunking that motley group. You forgot to mention 'Lord' Christopher Monckton.

Paella wrote on Dec 21^st, 2009 at 11:12pm:

By the way, during the so called "medieval warming period", which I personally believe, assuming the data is accurate, WAS probably something MORE than a normal statistical variation, it was a lot cooler than it is now.

We could argue that point until the cows come home. Basically we're talking proxy data. The best (most complete, most representative)  proxy data we have is from Law Dome, using the Deuterium proxy. This shows a dip around 1500 to 1800 for the Little Ice Age. This is matched by a corresponding dip in CO2 readings.

As you quite rightly point out, the Medieval Warm Period is generally understood to be a regional effect.

Global temperature proxy records show that taken globally, the Earth may have been slightly cooler (by 0.03 degrees Celsius) during the 'Medieval Warm Period' than in the early- and mid-20th century, and was down about 0.4 degrees on more recent global temperatures.

Also from the IPCC TAR 2001:


Quote:

current evidence does not support globally synchronous periods of anomalous cold or warmth over this time frame, and the conventional terms of 'Little Ice Age' and 'Medieval Warm Period' appear to have limited utility in describing trends in hemispheric or global mean temperature changes in past centuries

Ref: How Warm Was the Medieval Warm Period? Thomas J. Crowley and Thomas S. Lowery Ambio, Vol. 29, No. 1 (Feb., 2000), pp. 51-54