George Carlin

Erik Solheim, UN Energy Program chief

Am very interested in your work.

If possible please keep me updated.

http://www.c3headlines.com/peer-reviewed-studies/

For instance, these “experts” do not even understand where their favorite argument – “97% of all scientists believe in AGW” – even came from and what it was that was really done to create this ridiculous meaningless argument. FYI, this bit of propaganda came from a pro-AGW site named skepticalscience.com. Go there and discover that these scientists actually said nothing. What happened was a group of AGW sympathizers reviewed 11,944 papers in the database. They than judged that 3693 or so of these touched on climate science. They then graded these papers based on their own WAG as to what the author’s position was. From this they deduced that 97 % supported the AGW notion. But here the whole truth is that all that they concluded was that 97% of these scientists were judged to believe that mankind was responsible for between only ZERO and half of the global warming which took place since 1800. In fact, they themselves concluded that only 65 of these papers expressly state the fact that man is likely responsible for most warming since 1900 while 75 papers state that they do not believe that mankind is responsible for any climate change. The bottomline of this study is this: The AGW sympathizers who graded these papers to guess at the author’s belief in their global warming mantra could only stretch their conclusion to state accurately that 97% of the authors of these papers would likely agree that man is responsible for between ZERO and half of the 1 deg C which has taken place since 1900. If you doubt this, go to the skepticalscience site yourself and look at the hard data from https://www.skepticalscience.com/tcp.php?t=search.

Some of you, not many probably, but some of you will figure out how to use the data query tool provided. Most of you however will simply call me names because I understand this differently than they do and have chose not to blindly worship their false prophet.

I wonder how many of these climate change wack-avists ever question “how it it” that they think they know what they think they know? Those wack-tavists that I have debated with seem to have never read even one real paper on climate change. Test this for yourselves and you will discover that they do not even know the bare basics of this such as; what percent of the atmosphere is CO2, or how CO2 is even supposed to work to warm the planet. If this describes you, than you should perhaps at least consider doing a minimum of research on your own before you start hurling names at those of us who have researched this and conclude differently than do you.

I also wonder if these people who think they are doing good ever think about the damage that their participation in this group hysteria will cause the poorest of the poor. The guess of those pundits who venture a WAG is that it would take 50 years and $50 trillion to keep global warming within some arbitrary 2 deg C window they advocate. For a moment just think of all the good this $50 trillion could do if it were invested in truly needed efforts to better the conditions of the 3 billion poorest souls on this earth.