Richard Black from the BBC News website sent out a questionnaire to climate sceptic groups in order to test the alternative 'consensus.' He is now able to report the results:
What do "climate sceptics" believe?
Despite having reported on climate change for more than a decade, I realised at the beginning of the year that I was not entirely sure.
Read 'Unravelling the sceptics'
See also 'Climate scepticism: The top 10'
Louis
I'm failing to see where the science is in the bald assertions you are making.
Perhaps a little more explanation to your claim is in order.
Louis - "Newbies
The hypothesis that CO2 is a greenhouse gas is initially contradicted by the measurements of the chemical compositions of the atmospheres of Venus, Earth and Mars compared to their surface temperatures."
Righhhhhht.... Louis I think even the newest newbie on this list could see this statement for the crap that it is. Give it a rest.
Louis - "Ender, (but your real ID is known to me, ya?) but are you really serious about referencing http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm ?"
Yes it is the best summary on the net written by someone who understands the science.
"SPENCER R. WEART () is Director of the Center for History of Physics of the American Institute of Physics (AIP) in College Park, Maryland, USA. Originally trained as a physicist, he is now a noted historian specializing in the history of modern physics and geophysics.
Born in Detroit, Michigan in 1942, he received a B.A. in Physics at Cornell University in 1963 and a Ph.D. in Physics and Astrophysics at the University of Colorado, Boulder, in 1968. He then worked for three years at the California Institute of Technology, supported as a Fellow of the Mount Wilson and Palomar Observatories. At Caltech he taught physics, did research on the sun's atmosphere and on ground-based and space-based telescope instrumentation, and published papers in leading scientific journals."
I think Spencer might have chance of knowing what he is talking about hence the reference.
Newbies
The hypothesis that CO2 is a greenhouse gas is initially contradicted by the measurements of the chemical compositions of the atmospheres of Venus, Earth and Mars compared to their surface temperatures.
But as it is science, this conclusion is tentative, as it is science.
That it is not so, is in the domain of religion which I have zero expertise.
Ender, (but your real ID is known to me, ya?) but are you really serious about referencing http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm ?
I can nuke it, (metaphorically), just on the summary paragraph.
Woody - "It's not like the whole word believed that there were no temperature changes until someone disputed that"
You really need to read Spencer's history here:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm
The establishment were extremely skeptical of AGW until the pioneers convinced them with hard science.
Read the link it is worth it.
Woody - "It's not like the whole word believed that there were no temperature changes until someone disputed that"
You really need to read Spencer's history here:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/co2.htm
The establishment were extremely skeptical of AGW until the pioneers convinced them with hard science.
Read to link it is worth it.
Hi all.
Dumb question, what do skeptics (scientists) believe?
Shouldn't the question have been waht does the evidence indicate?
Have we move from theory to a proof?
Ask a priest for belief and scientists for their opinion based in evidence and research.
Al Gore didn't make it up, he's not a scientist. "We" know better? You're a scientist?
ST, that just isn't true. It's not like the whole word believed that there were no temperature changes until someone disputed that. The Al Gore's of the world just made it up and ran with it. They weren't skeptics. It's like you guys are trying to take us back to the flat earth theory but we know better.