Re: Consensus or senseless con?

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
news:6ah0h3F37gaatU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:



"Herb Martin" <news@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:4843441e$0$12949$4c368faf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Trevor Wilson" <trevor@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:6agqt9F36cshgU1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Do you believe that CO2 is a greenhouse gas? IE: Does it
contribute to global warming?

There are some studies that point to CO2 cooling the earth, and
that CO2
is caused by warming, not vise versa.

**Cite please.

I am curious too, but will *YOU* believe him if he
produces those, study it, and even believe it if it is
well done?

If it dishonest to ask for a citation you will not use.

**I will not comment until I read his peer-reviewed study.

IOW, you refuse agree to accept expert evidence.....but then we
already knew you ignore experts unless they say what you want to hear.

**I will not comment until I read his peer-reviewed study.

Here's peer review for you Trevor -- remember don't comment
until you have both read it and only using peer reviewed sources:

Gun Laws and Sudden Death

<SNIP> Irrelevant twaddle.

**Nope. Nothing about global warming there. Try again.



http://www.petitionproject.org/gwdatabase/GWPP/Review_Article.html

Summary of Peer-Reviewed Research

Most scientists have a detailed knowledge of their own narrow field of
specialization, a general knowledge of fundamental science, an understanding
of the scientific method, and a mental model that encompasses a broad range of
scientific disciplines. This model serves as the basis of their thoughts about
scientific questions.

When a scientist desires to refine his understanding of a specific scientific
subject, he often begins by reading one or more review articles about that
topic. As he reads, he compares the facts given in the review with his mental
model of the subject, refining his model and updating it with current
information. Review articles do not present new discoveries. The essential
facts given in the review must be referenced to the peer-reviewed scientific
research literature, so that the reader can check the assertions and
conclusions of the article and obtain more detailed information about aspects
that interest him.

A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is
circulated with the petition. To view the entire article in html, 150-dpi PDF,
300-dpi PDF, 600-dpi PDF or figures alone in powerpoint or flash, click on the
appropriate item in this sentence.


The factual information cited in this article is referenced to the underlying
research literature, in this case by 132 references listed at the end of the
article. Although written primarily for scientists, most of this article can
be understood without formal scientific training. This article was submitted
to many scientists for comments and suggestions before it was finalized and
submitted for publication. It then underwent ordinary peer review by the
publishing journal.

The United Nations IPCC also publishes a research review in the form of a
voluminous, occasionally-updated report on the subject of climate change,
which the United Nations asserts is ?authored? by approximately 600
scientists. These ?authors? are not, however ? as is ordinarily the custom in
science ? permitted power of approval the published review of which they are
putative authors. They are permitted to comment on the draft text, but the
final text neither conforms to nor includes many of their comments. The final
text conforms instead to the United Nations objective of building support for
world taxation and rationing of industrially-useful energy.

Frank
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Consensus or senseless con?
    ... he compares the facts given in the review with his mental ... A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is ... research literature, in this case by 132 references listed at the end of the ... Although written primarily for scientists, ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: OT: Senate Report - NO GLOBAL WARMING
    ... desire to research each and every one of those 400 scientists. ... mankind's use of carbon fuels, that cause global warming," Odell wrote ... so generating voluminous additional carbon dioxide ... basis) on many issues that were raised in my review. ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)
  • Re: Consensus or senseless con?
    ... he compares the facts given in the review with his mental ... A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is ... research literature, in this case by 132 references listed at the end of the ... Although written primarily for scientists, ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Consensus or senseless con?
    ... he compares the facts given in the review with his mental ... A 12-page review article about the human-caused global warming hypothesis is ... research literature, in this case by 132 references listed at the end of the ... Although written primarily for scientists, ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Cold fusion is back!
    ... because you ignore the fact that the peer ... :>: review committee of an internationally respected scientific journal ... :>: found their paper acceptable for publication and that OTHER scientists ... reviewed journals and has reviewed papers for peer review journals, ...
    (sci.chem)