Mass delusional media scientific illiteracy that ends up shilling for industry lobbyist denial and delay campaigning needs to be exposed.

This is one of the worst disinformation talking points from the dimbulb limboob bag of tricks.

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog John Schneider, Northern Wisconsin

gotta look "rational" and "balanced" so the inside-the-beltway folks will take you seriously, don't ya know. these scientists are just so childish. that's the reason achenbach got a degree in poli sci, not science. it was certainly not because the subject was too hard.

At the roots of climate change denial are world outlooks and attitudes including:

 A fundamental view of nature as a subsidiary of human economy and open ended growth.

 Acceptance of the use of the atmosphere as an open sewer for Carbon products resulting from some 400 million years of evolution.

 Objection to the scientific method, manifested by ad-hominem and conspiracy theories directed toward scientists, science organizations, science journals, the peer review systems.

 Indifference toward biological species, bio-diversity, the fate of large black and brown and yellow populations who would be the first to suffer from desertification and sea level rise.

And while the evidence for a climate crisis in force, with consequences on a scale analogous to geological mass extinctions, compels Homo "sapiens" to its moment of truth, at the roots of denial is the religion of open ended material growth and, in some instances, fundamentalist acceptance of human-triggered demise, where the 'righteous' (and those who can pay) will be saved.

Dr Andrew Glikson Earth and paleo-climate research scientist A.N.U., Canberra, A.C.T. Australia (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) //= 0; i=i-1){ if (l[i].substring(0, 1) == ' ') output += "&#"+unescape(l[i].substring(1))+";"; else output += unescape(l[i]); } document.getElementById('eeEncEmail_9gTD5YCIsu').innerHTML = output; //]]>

At the roots of AGW Fundamentalism are world outlooks and attitudes including:

A fundamental view that humans are not part of nature, but instead are a pestilence visited upon it.

Acceptance of the concept that human activity above all other inputs is responsible for climate change, despite the lack of evidence.

Denial of the connection between your paycheck and the need for a "climate crisis" that can be attributed to human activity.

Profound confusion over whether or not Darwin was correct about species diversity.  

As always, we are left with the never to be answered question. What set of data would lead you to believe that human activity affects the climate in any significant way? Hypothetically.

Your conflict of interest is only slightly greater than that of the tobacco execs defending cigarettes.

"...a 90 percent chance that the US has contributed .2 degrees F of temperature increase in the last 50 years..." The IPCC Consensus in perspective