31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming To be Named

31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Theory To be Named Monday
NewsBusters ^ | May 18, 2008 | Noel Sheppard

The names of over 31,000 American scientists that reject the theory of anthropogenic global warming are to be revealed Monday.

... this will occur at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...

And in his vest pocket Joe McCarthy alleged that he had the names of hundreds of "communists" who worked for the U.S. State Department.

But he never actually revealed that list to anyone.

I'll be reviewing it to see if it contains the names of any dead people.

lindaredtail wrote:I'll be reviewing it to see if it contains the names of any dead people.

Linda Redtail,
It makes Iron Eyes Cody cry that you actually believe in Global Warming...


P.S.
Iron Eyes was a RMA! He was misassigned as Italian.

Oh well Armon. Iron Eyes will have to live with it.

Iron Eyes was Italian? Ya learn sumpthin' new every day.

Stephanie wrote:Iron Eyes was Italian? Ya learn sumpthin' new every day.

Actually, he was Sicilian. He was also RMA. http://www.snopes.com/movies/actors/ironeyes.asp

Stephanie I wish you and your family well. Enjoy your new pets. This will be my last post. We all do what we feel that we need to do and I will continue to pursue what I think is appropriate. Sometimes my thoughts are just for myself and my own situation. Sometimes my thoughts are how many times has this person done this same thing to someone else. Then the second question becomes How many people will this person do it to in the future and once aware of a situation what does my responsibility become.I plan on continuing to pursue the subject of Sam both with the state of WV and with the federal government's E-commerce.gov and the other agencies which may apply. My previous post to you was not due to your opinion of global warming though I know that you choose to believe that. It is because in all of mine and Sam's interactions you chose to chastise me for calling him a liar but not him for his degrading humiliating comments that have no place on any forum. His type of commentary is far more than just hurt feelings. Your reactiion was biased. And as the administrator of this site and responsible for what is posted here you are lucky that I have chosen to just confront the situation with him and am not suing you for allowing his bad behavior which it is apparent from previous posts and the way that he acts towards others as well you are completely aware of. But as I previously stated I do wish you well. Think of it as your lucky day that you have kids and dogs.

ziggy wrote:And in his vest pocket Joe McCarthy alleged that he had the names of hundreds of "communists" who worked for the U.S. State Department.

But he never actually revealed that list to anyone.

What's the relevance, Zig? We're talking about specifically man-made global warming. I'd venture to say that there are many scientists who doubt man-made global warming but are afraid to say so lest they lose their jobs or lose respectability.

The "high priests" have decreed that our actions are causing the earth to warm, and anyone who doubts this is accused of being in bed with big oil. It's not that I give a hoot about big oil, nor that I doubt that man's actions are hurting the enviornment. It's that I do not believe the matter is settled as scientists (many with a carbon footprint the size of Shaquille O'Neal's Nike) tell me it is.

lindaredtail wrote:Stephanie I wish you and your family well. Enjoy your new pets. This will be my last post. We all do what we feel that we need to do and I will continue to pursue what I think is appropriate. Sometimes my thoughts are just for myself and my own situation. Sometimes my thoughts are how many times has this person done this same thing to someone else. Then the second question becomes How many people will this person do it to in the future and once aware of a situation what does my responsibility become.I plan on continuing to pursue the subject of Sam both with the state of WV and with the federal government's E-commerce.gov and the other agencies which may apply. My previous post to you was not due to your opinion of global warming though I know that you choose to believe that. It is because in all of mine and Sam's interactions you chose to chastise me for calling him a liar but not him for his degrading humiliating comments that have no place on any forum. His type of commentary is far more than just hurt feelings. Your reactiion was biased. And as the administrator of this site and responsible for what is posted here you are lucky that I have chosen to just confront the situation with him and am not suing you for allowing his bad behavior which it is apparent from previous posts and the way that he acts towards others as well you are completely aware of. But as I previously stated I do wish you well. Think of it as your lucky day that you have kids and dogs.

Why have the icecaps on Mars melted? SUVs? George Boosh's environmental policies? OR, could it be that the sun affects temperatures on the planets--including Earth?

The case of Wisconsin Sen. Joe McCarthy is one in which the losers got to write history. Would I be out of line to guess that you believe Alger Hiss was innocent?

M. Stanton Evans who recently wrote a study of McCarthy had this to say recently about McCarthy’s list:

...Scarcely better is Kessler’s repetition, as supposed fact, of the discredited notion that McCarthy claimed a list of “205 Communists” in the State Department, then crawfished and changed the number to 57. (McCarthy’s version was that he never claimed 205, but had said 57 all along.) I devote two chapters to this issue, showing (a) that the alleged documentation of McCarthy’s supposed lying about the numbers was a backstage concoction of the State Department, and (b) that the charge of McCarthy’s having claimed 205 was debunked in 1951 by investigators for a Democratically controlled committee of the Senate. (Curiously, after the investigators turned in a 40-page report that in essence backed McCarthy, their memo would abruptly vanish—to be recovered later.)

http://www.campusreportonline.net/main/articles.php?id=2316

McCarthy, I think we will agree, was a sad alcoholic who showed great promise at one time. While we may not like all that he accomplished, I suspect we would disagree whether his list was correct. You hint that the list never existed. But others still argue about the number of names on it. The list not only existed, not only was revealed, but is still studied and, apparently, debated.

31,000 scientists publicly reject man-mad global warming, and still no coverage of the announcement?

According to Dr. Robinson of the Oregon Institute of Science & Medicine, the scheduled announcement of the Global Warming Petition Project took place as scheduled at 10am EDT this morning at the National Press Club (10am).

The Petition states:

We urge the United States government to reject the global warming agreement that was written in Kyoto, Japan in December, 1997, and any other similar proposals. The proposed limits on greenhouse gases would harm the environment, hinder the advance of science and technology, and damage the health and welfare of mankind.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

One would think that the public announcement of this petition, signed by 31,072 scientists (including over 9,000 Ph.Ds), and announced at the National Press Club itself, would garner quite a lot of publicity.

Then again, maybe not. (What was I thinking?)

If there has been a single news article about it anywhere, I have yet to find it.

Looks like the Global Warming Debate Deniers strike again.

IF there is GLOBAL Warming, why did the Kyoto Protocol exempt INDIA and CHINA from the global "don't pee in the pool" policy? Politics?

http://www.petitionproject.org/index.html

Not that Wikipedia is the final word, but there is this:

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


There is some dispute about whether or not McCarthy actually gave the number of people on the list as being "205" or "57". In a later telegram to President Truman, and when entering the speech into the Congressional Record, he used the number 57.^[22] The origin of the number 205 can be traced: In later debates on the Senate floor, McCarthy referred to a 1946 letter that then–Secretary of State James Byrnes sent to Congressman Adolph J. Sabath. In that letter, Byrnes said State Department security investigations had resulted in "recommendation against permanent employment" for 284 persons, and that 79 of these had been removed from their jobs; this left 205 still on the State Department's payroll. In fact, by the time of McCarthy's speech only about 65 of the employees mentioned in the Byrnes letter were still with the State Department, and all of these had undergone further security checks.^[23]

lindaredtail wrote:Stephanie I wish you and your family well. Enjoy your new pets. This will be my last post. We all do what we feel that we need to do and I will continue to pursue what I think is appropriate. Sometimes my thoughts are just for myself and my own situation. Sometimes my thoughts are how many times has this person done this same thing to someone else. Then the second question becomes How many people will this person do it to in the future and once aware of a situation what does my responsibility become.I plan on continuing to pursue the subject of Sam both with the state of WV and with the federal government's E-commerce.gov and the other agencies which may apply. My previous post to you was not due to your opinion of global warming though I know that you choose to believe that. It is because in all of mine and Sam's interactions you chose to chastise me for calling him a liar but not him for his degrading humiliating comments that have no place on any forum. His type of commentary is far more than just hurt feelings. Your reactiion was biased. And as the administrator of this site and responsible for what is posted here you are lucky that I have chosen to just confront the situation with him and am not suing you for allowing his bad behavior which it is apparent from previous posts and the way that he acts towards others as well you are completely aware of. But as I previously stated I do wish you well. Think of it as your lucky day that you have kids and dogs.

Well LRT I hope you will reconsider.

I share your view that common courtesy and a respectful attitude should be expected.

It is true that that person is Stephanie's pet poster and she rushes to defend him every time the issue of playing well with others comes up.

It kinda reminds me of the story of the prodigal son in the Bible.

I try to exercise common courtesy and restraint and she castigates me with vile epithets.

But I continue to cling to the dream of a spontaneous pervasion of poetic justice on this here forum.

I try to exercise common courtesy and restraint and she castigates me with vile epithets.

Care to show an example of this, Sherm?

A lot happened with Linda and her various aliases while you were gone. I'm pretty sure I deleted all the really outrageous posts. I regret that now.

Well one example is when you referred to me as just a dirty political hack.

But I think I know the real reason you tried to run LRT off.

Sam,

I didn't run her off. I banned her ip subnet. I do not believe I used the word "dirty" btw.

I don't believe I can retrieve those posts I deleted. I am so sorry I did that now. She was a nutcase. Linda created at least 3 new identities to post with, one being the "black woman" Takara. She threatened me with a lawsuit because Sam used the phrase "lily white" in a thread that had NOTHING to do with race. She threatened Sam with state and federal law enforcement. She was disruptive and harrassing us and threatening to get forumotion to shut this forum down. So, I got rid of her.

Sherm, Linda did go way overboard. And I don't think that she was a paid infiltrator here as someone had suggested.

My biggest regret is that, along with deleting the worst of Linda's posts, that Stephanie didn't delete the worst of Sam's assinine posts that provoked Linda to such hysteria.

Well zig I suspected she was paid. And I suspected a couple other lefties were too that showed up on the old Gazette forum right before the election.

But that's neither here nor there, as they say.

She did seem to stimulate some good discussion.

But just like on the old forum, some of the established forum posters really dont like new posters moving in with new ideas.

They just want to repeat the same old mantra Rightwing good leftwing bad.

They tolerate you and me because although we have progressive views we are kinda wishywashy about it and try to kowtow to them to not upset them too much.

But these wild-eyed obamabots dont exercize the same civility in the face of disrespectful treatment so they get banned or run off.

they must be working with a pretty loose definition of the word "scientist". i doubt there are 31,000 climate scientists in the country.

Well hyperstation do you mind if I call you hyperstation?

You seem to be fair and objective.

Are you all starstruck with this Obama guy and think he is pure as the driven snow?

Stephanie wrote:Sam,

I didn't run her off. I banned her ip subnet. I do not believe I used the word "dirty" btw.

I don't believe I can retrieve those posts I deleted. I am so sorry I did that now. She was a nutcase. Linda created at least 3 new identities to post with, one being the "black woman" Takara. She threatened me with a lawsuit because Sam used the phrase "lily white" in a thread that had NOTHING to do with race. She threatened Sam with state and federal law enforcement. She was disruptive and harrassing us and threatening to get forumotion to shut this forum down. So, I got rid of her.

On her first post, I thought it was her. After a few I was pretty sure. When she mentioned a CBS forum, I knew.

The Gazette Forum turned into a version of The Daily Mail Forum. They didn't want to police it and they had legal liability for all the nut jobs who felt like they could say anything they wanted. I think the forum administrator has made plenty clear that she doesn't want to be the forum policeman. If you feel you've been treated badly here it is up to you to defend yourself.

We do not tolerate you or Zig and you are not "wishywashy" about your views on social justice and victimology. You're simply wrong. We actively looked for you to invite you here. You are not a victim and you are not tolerated. You are a member the same as anybody else and you give as good as you get.

And Hillary Clinton is not being treated unfairly either.