Global Warming? are humans to blame?

what that also means, although you have to actually read it and understand the scientific process in order to catch it is that of the 1,372 scientists publishing in the field that were considered there citations were also considered. As anyone who's actually written a paper will know the typical number of citations never falls bellow 3 and can number in the hundreds.

so if the study also considered citations which is clearly states it did then you can multiply that 1.372 number by at least three and more accurately by something approaching 30~50 which might represent a more accurate average number of citations per article.

Means that the numbers considered were way more than just 1,372 in case you were having trouble following all that.

 

ive read the whole report. you know the title..download it yourself

 

Do you need some assistance with including links. Sometimes new folks have trouble figuring it out?

 

for example


oh and just for fun you might want to check what your posting.

For instance, having taken no time at all to actually investigate your supporting citation you've asked me to investigate a sites that among other things entirely demolished your claim that there is a large body of dissenting opinion among the scientists involved.

"Sorry Pal" but read it and weep

from
http://bbickmore.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/marc_moranos_ipcc_dissenters/

the 8th reference down on the google page you linked as some form of support for your opinion

it does in fact the exact opposite, exposing the fallacy of any significant dissent among the scientists involved.

 

its a scam pal. don't be obtuse. Do you want the world to end up crispy crackers?
I'd think anybody in their right mind would gladly read and hope it was true, that thered been an error? that we were safe after all and could stop worrying?
why isn't that attractive to you?
have you invested too much ego in global warming you can't , dont dare reverse yourself?

 

I believe nothing put forth by U.N.. It is just another stab to the heart of the United States in particular and Freedom in general.

 

they changed the url since yesterday. The link i posted, I downloaded from. today its a different document incredible. but i got the correct one in text and pdf. ill send you the pdf if you tell me where

 

is there anyway to upload pdf on the forumn?

 

nope and you gotta watch how much of anything you post, unless of course its open source

 

Just load the link and leave it at that.

 

speaking of which your opinion that "its a scam" remains unsubstantiated.

CO2 is a greenhouse gas
it is the result of an exothermic reaction
excess amounts in the atmosphere can be trace directly the burning of fossil fuels
global warming is undoubtedly the result of this process.

what parts a scam and what scientific evidence do you have to support that opinion

none would be my guess

which is why in your next post you will ignore the question and fail to produce one shred of peer reviewed work on topic

 

CO2 is a product of combustion but not the cause. Vegetation cures CO2 and makes O2 which we desperately need to burn our fossil fuels. Go plant something.

 

No doubt youre an inteligent man, Boston. Me too. I'm sucessfull not just in one culture, but several around the globe. speak 2 languages fluently, and can get by in a handfull more. I have a degree in mathematical science. But more, With 4 years of maritime college lets you exam for 3rd mate. 2 years exp, more study, more exams to 2nd mate, more study, experience and exams to chief mate, more study exams experience to master. I hold Master steam and motor oceans, Master of towing, and First class pilot all 5 great lakes any gross tons....thats a PHD in Seamanship, actually the 4 year degree is bachelor of naval science to be 3rd mate. I'm smart,too

 

obviously there is a slight disparity between production and use

 

yet you insist 1+1=3