Comments on: Congressman Rohrabacher’s Paper Tiger

By: Is Patrick Michaels Trying to Pass Us a Counterfeit $20 Bill? « Global Warming: Man or Myth?

Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:46:30 +0000

[...] Of the seven authors of the Cato Counterfeit Report only five have any publications and two have dubious backgrounds. There really is no comparison between the authors of the real report from USGCRP and the authors of the fake report. (Cato Institute has a history of documents with few real experts named. See: Congressman Rohrabacher’s Paper Tiger.) [...]

By: Scott Mandia

Scott Mandia — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 21:39:19 +0000

Nicholas,

I appreciate the offer but it is unnecessary and very time-intensive. You will notice many of the same names on the various petitions. Most of these signers have little to no credibility while those that actually do the research have many, many publications to support their conclusions.

By: citizenschallenge

citizenschallenge — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 20:08:20 +0000

Sorry Professor Mandia, I do appreciate you know light-years more about these details than I do. Still I wish more could be done to underscore the shear dishonestly of the warming-stopped claim. peter

Mandia: If one follows those links it is quite clear the claims in this letter are without support. Never a problem if you wish to elaborate in comments.

By: citizenschallenge

citizenschallenge — Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:59:03 +0000

(Item #4 is an automatic disqualifier in my book because any legitimate expert should know that a decade cannot be used to refute the underlying climate trend. This claim is especially absurd given that the past three decades have been the warmest in the instrumental record!)
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
I was disappointed by the incompleteness of the above answer:
Claiming the past decade showed no upward trend is ignoring that the claim was made on the basis of Surface Sea Temperatures, consisting of the statical trick of picking one freakish extreme temperature event as its starting point and ignoring the preceding trend.

It also ignores that heat has continued to accumulate within the oceans.
~ ~ ~
For more detailed information visit:
SkepticalScience.com

“3 levels of cherry picking in a single argument”
“Did global warming stop in 1998?”
among other informative articles

By: The Climate Change Debate Thread - Page 670

The Climate Change Debate Thread - Page 670 — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 19:26:58 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Nicholas Berini

Nicholas Berini — Wed, 13 Apr 2011 18:33:02 +0000

Scott,

Would love to see these 115 directly compared to the NAS and/or IPCC contributors. It would probably look something like every other assessment of the “consensus” ie 97-99% to 1-3%.

Would be happy to help with such an effort.

By: grypo

grypo — Tue, 12 Apr 2011 12:18:33 +0000

What does “net” global warming mean?