I suggest you glean through the 31,000 names and check out their CV for yourself.
I say their credentials are valid to debate this issue from an opposing view. You find the facts to disprove me.
I’ve been through this argument- when the journals and books that global warming critics publish are cited, the argument by the liberal left intellectual mafia is that they are not “peer reviewed”. Not withstanding the fact that “the peers” have their panties tightly twisted enough to sneer about the substance of those books and journals.
Or they dig into someone’s background and discover that when they were a grad student, he/she worked under a grant from - gasp- a petroleum institute or GE or some evil commercial entity that is out to rape the planet. Or they spoke at a symposium or receievd funding through the Discovery Institute. How liberal intellectuals HATE the Discovery Institute. Bunch of anti-scientific knuckle dragging neocon creationists. So how could their discoveries possibly be considered valid? Dismissal of the messenger’s worthiness to be heard is the form or “peer review” usually practiced. (But check out the CV of the scientists affiliated).
Frankly with the PC attitude of our universities and even our Govt institutions which are staffed by anonymous but rabidly liberal minions, peer review means - censorship. Soft or hard.
So, it is hard to get “peer reviewed” when the peers have their minds made up, when you are censored from receiving funding to challenge those veiws, when you have to climb over high hurdles and find secondary sources to publish, and when the ultimate weapon is censure (ridicule, professional shunning, or even job loss) if you manage to do so. The “peers’” tactic these days is to attack and discredit the speaker, thus leaving themselves
(so they believe) immune and far too intellectually superior to debate the weight of his argument.
For an example of this elitist censorship, check out the scientific credentials of Rickard Dawkin.
“Not peer reviewed” is a rather ingenuous and vacuous standard, in this day. But hey- knock yourself out.
But also check out the CV of those who criticize them. For starters, have you checked out global leader Algor’s scientific background?
“Check out the credentials of Rickard Dawkin.”
By this do you mean Richard Dawkins? While there are references to Rickard Dawkins on Google. In fact his name is Richard Dawkins, and he has an MA and D.Phil. from Oxford Univ. His genius is in synthesizing a number of different approaches to scientific information and developing a new paradigm.
In looking over the credentials of thed 31K petitioners I see that physicist Edward Teller is headlined at the top. He died in 2003 at the age of 95, and the petition was from 1997 objecting to the Koyto agreement. There certainly were flaws in that agreement, so what is presented about Teller does not indicate whether he rejected the problem of climate change, merely the conclusions at that time. Of course, George Bush rejected the problem at that time, but now, 5 years later he seems rather convinced. How old are the signatures of these 31K scientists, we need to know their current views and even if they are still alive.
In addition, I note that almost 10,000 are engineer, mostly electrical. Where is the list for civil engineers, who are the ones who will have to deal with the flooding of cities and other major storm damage. In all there are only 40 climatologists listed, and I would love to know who they are so I could examine their credentials and state of aliveness. There are many more meteorologists listed, but they do not usually understand climatology very well, as the technical focus is quite different as is the education.
I hope this is enough facts. Give me more details, I will give you more facts.
That shouldn't be hard at all, because the very basis of this thread is the 97% figure which has been proven again and again to be an out and out incompetent fraud.
It is based on the rousing, carefully culled TOTAL of 78 or 80 TOTAL out of several hundred respondents (still a minuscule number)!
I have no desire to waste my time to do the work for you that any informed adult should be able to handle all by herlself.
Good luck.