Inhofe's 400 Global Warming Deniers Debunked

List of "Scientists" Includes Economists, Amateurs, TV Weathermen and Industry Hacks

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/inhofe-global-warming-deniers-47011101

<snip>

But it takes a Hercules up to 12 labors-worth of boredom to prove it. Our Hercules is Mark V. Johnson, who works for AOL's Propeller.com. He endured 413 labors, one for each supposed expert on Inhofe's list, so you wouldn't have to.

He combed through university profiles, oil money think tank rosters, news stories and the now-robust literature of climate skeptic debunking. He couldn't identify every name, and we'll say at the outset that there may well be a handful of skeptics on this list with legitimate knowledge of climate science who question some aspect of the theory. It is, however, useful to remember that a theory, in science, is as good as gold (lest we start doubting something so incredible as the theory of gravity).

Here's a quick breakdown of Johnson's findings:

*

Inhofe's list includes 413 people. (Score one Inhofe; the math holds up.)
*

84 have either taken money from, or are connected to, fossil fuel industries, or think tanks started by those industries.
*

49 are retired
*

44 are television weathermen
*

20 are economists
*

70 have no apparent expertise in climate science
*

Several supposed skeptics have publicly stated that they are very concerned about global warming, and support efforts to address it. One claims he was duped into signing the list and regrets it.

Before we get ahead of ourselves, here are some concessions and explanations:

*

Taking money from companies that have an established stake in burning fossil fuels doesn't mean your science is junk, but it ought to sound alarm bells for anyone aiming for the label of "skeptic."
*

Being retired doesn't mean you've lost your smarts, but it does make it harder to be considered "prominent" on a cutting-edge issue.
*

Weathermen help us navigate the vagaries of weather on a local level every day, but this isn't a discipline that requires forecasting world climate conditions decades from now. (Prominent? In one sense: They are more frequently seen and heard.)
*

Economists, clearly, are valuable participants in policy debates. Clearly, they aren't climate scientists.
*

Finally, we could line up 59 regular people (hi Mom!) who don't have any particular expertise in climate science, but believe adamantly in it. You wouldn't care what they think.

Here is our conclusion: Any list with that much "filler" ought to raise the hair on any skeptic's neck.

Science is the only discipline built on skepticism. It's the job of every scientist to question, and test, his or her own conclusions, and those of colleagues.

The whole fact Inhofe was trying to debunk – that there is a broad consensus among scientists that global warming is real, caused by humans and a serious threat – was only articulated because of hoaxes perpetrated by the so-called skeptics on this list. (Why not assume Inhofe found them all?) By undermining the press and politicians on the issue, those global warming skeptics helped keep the problem from being recognized, let alone addressed, for years. One could say they stood squarely in the path of truth, and thwarted its progress, jujitsu-style, until finally being overrun by a triumphantly emboldened mass.



Click here for the entire list of 413 "prominent scientists," analyzed in detail.

http://www.thedailygreen.com/environmental-news/latest/inhofe-global-warming-deniers-scientists-46011008

I can't convince him-- he's a libertarian!

Can't vouch for meterologists -- they all seem one fry short of a Happy Meal.

is because of ideology more then because of science.

and said he believed in warming but was not anywhere near convinced it was anthropomorphic.

is that it needs to be debunked at all.

144. Dr. Mel Goldstein, PhD, TV weathernman/meteorologist.
http://www.wtnh.com/Global/story.asp?S=27202

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mel_Goldstein

I always thought he was a bit of a goofball, but this?

:rofl:

Kicked and recommended.

What the fuck is his problem? It's not just that he's evil, it's that he seems so gleeful about it.



Y'know...there is something about the guy. Check out his official picture:









Now put him in a mask:














Coincidence? I think NOT!

good but, I always LOVED the riddler.