In response to:

The Coming Environmental Battles

chicaree Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 12:34 PM
"but climate alarmism has always been about political science, not real science" A recent review of peer reviewed scientific articles on climate change. 24 of the 13,950 articles, 0.17 percent or 1 in 581, clearly reject global warming or endorse a cause other than CO2 emissions for observed warming. Peer review is the standard of excellence in science. It prevents faulty or faked data and woe to the scientist that is guilty of shoddy work. We turn our back on proven scientific methods and risk more extreme weather disasters we have recently experienced.
JHPainter Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 8:50 PM
Peer review works great when the majority of your peers agree with you from the onset and you ignore those peers with a different opinion. To simplify it for climate hysterics, it's like when a child gets a no from mom, he goes to dad to get a yes.
Righty3 Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 3:20 PM
You mean like the results of the Hadley Climate Research Unit in England were peer-reviewed? Or the nice folks at the NASA-funded Sea Level Research Group (University of Colorado) deciding to add an arbitrary few inches to sea levels?

Today, while most people refer to these and similar scandals as "Climategate", fools like you try to defend the process. I'd have no issue with it, if that's as far as it went, but extremists are very likely to create millions of unemployed people based on their junk science.

The issue isn't climate change - the issue is whether human activities impact climate. My own search of the peer-reviewed literature turns up approximately 2,400 articles rejecting human-caused climate change...guess you missed those?
canetoad Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 7:27 PM
Would you like to provide a few links for us, around 200 of these articles you speak of would do. They need to be peer reviewed.
John C6 Wrote: Nov 17, 2012 8:24 PM
It's an abuse of the system to reply to your own
posts using a different moniker.

The United States is now Balkanized into five distinct voting blocs, says Joel Kotkin. Other political analysts see the nation bifurcating along “makers” and “takers” lines, while still others say 50.6% of the popular vote is hardly a mandate. In any event, when American voters reelected President Obama, they also returned his EPA, Interior, Energy and Justice Departments, and their wide-ranging agenda for “fundamentally transforming” our nation.

This won’t mean just Obamacare, higher taxes on businesses and families, rampant spending, and tens of thousands of pages of new regulations. It will also bring more disputes over energy and environmental...