UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
lol.
so it looks like you accept the conclusions of gerald a. meehl then. what does he say about AGW?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerald_Meehl
He was a lead author of the sixth chapter of the IPCC Second Assessment Report, published in 1995,[2][3] and helped oversee the chapter about climate projections in the IPCC AR4, published in 2007.[4] He is an ISI highly cited researcher,[5] and is known for his research linking global warming to extreme weather.[6][7][8] He has also done much research into the use of global climate models. One of these studies, in which Meehl et al. showed that models could not reproduce recent warming without including anthropogenic influences
how about julie arblaster then?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julie_Arblaster
Arblaster is a member of the World Climate Research Programme Stratospheric-Tropospheric Processes and their Role in Climate (SPARC) scientific steering group. She was a contributing author to the Working Group I contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2007,[3] and a lead author on the chapter on long-term climate change projections of the Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the IPCC.[4] This chapter reviewed the available evidence to understand how the world's climate might have changed by the middle of this century and beyond. Notably, this IPCC report was the first to outline how much additional carbon dioxide can be emitted to keep global temperatures below specific thresholds
i'll save both of us the time and just give you the spoiler: every single person who put together that abstract, which does not say what you think it says, are all hardcore proponents of human activities causing global warming.
so fucking stupid.
how can one person be so stupid?