Ive heard some feeble excuses in my time but that........... 
It's weird but I think I get why you're so entrenched, I'm willing to bet that you've never read a report that wasn't from a deniers perspective - like most of a narrow-mind you'll only read what you already believe to be true, me posting links to thousands upon thousands of reports would do no good - here's what I do Albs - someone gives you a truth, now metaphorically I take that nugget of truth and bend, shake, stretch, hammer, heat, freeze, sink it in short, test it to destruction - if it holds up it pretty much goes in the truth box. Now with climate change denial - I'd love to think it's all a hoax but every single piece of evidence supporting your stance has been thoroughly debunked as far as I'm aware! Now here's your exercise for today: name one, just one cast-iron fact that proves you're right - I'll show you it's wrong, then you give me another, again - I'll debunk it, you give me another and so on and so forth until there are no excuses left. How about that? Then will you stfu? 
Considering this;
name one, just one cast-iron fact that proves you're right - I'll show you it's wrong, then you give me another, again - I'll debunk it
Can the same not be said for you BJ?
why you're so entrenched
I'm happy to believe that you do in fact keep an open mind BJ but am disturbed somewhat that you seem to accept that the changing climate results solely/mainly from recent human activity.
I have no problem with accepting that there are indeed changes happening to the climatic balance we've all experienced and enjoyed over the recent past. As far as I’m concerned however this is part of the natural cycle driven by a living planet powered by its sun - the only reason incidentally for earth's ability to support life in the first place - - our impact in terms of atmospheric pollutants which may contribute to an overall heating (if this does indeed exist in any extensive way) is in my view minimal.
Where we
have altered things to the detriment of the planet seems to spring from avarice and the lust for power and influence: The stripping of the rain forest for gain, deforestation of vast swaths of land for the purposes of mining/building, the constant probing of the planet in the search for energy sources.
The list is extensive but always seems to depend on the use, and in some cases the over use, of planetary resources. This in my view is more worrying than the alleged overheating of the global atmosphere by what we’ve done over the last one hundred years or so.
Aside from this, I’m surprised that many apparently sensible people appear to accept, without question, the assertions of individuals/groups who maintain that the science is ‘settled’ in terms of AGW. Since when is science ever settled?
There is, undoubtedly, an agenda being formed by these people/groups but I would suggest that it’s concerned more with the desire for power, influence and the acquisition for money than it is for the health of the planet. And, while there have been many comments made about the trenchant nature of the AGW ‘deniers’, I would submit that this tendency pales into insignificance when compared to the evangelical fervour shown by the likes of former VP Gore, the UN, the IPCC, Greenpeace, WWF, FOTE and the EU to name but a few most of whom seem to be satisfied that the science has indeed been settled and no one has the legitimate right to question it and what they plan to do about it.
Author
Topic: Meltdown of the 'climate consensus' (Read 3340 times)