Some interesting links. I really want to believe to believe the deniers and again it is hard to figure out what to believe on the internet, my belief that there is gneral consensus comes mostly from the reporting on the IPCC report. I forget the number of scientists on that panel, but it was very large and they came to the consensus that global waring was real and it was very likely caused by human activities. With that large number of scientists there are going to at least a few dissenters, so it is not surprising to find them posting knowledgable dissents on the web.
A few of the first links just felt fishy, based on their agenda and some of the other posts were bizarre:
Europeans pay big for beastiality at barnyard brothels
Kim Jong-Il 'died in 2003', says Japanese professor
Blackwater: Knights of Malta in Iraq
Weird X-Files skin disease treated as a psychological disorder
Experts design the world's first practical flying car
Prodigy Says Jay-Z Sides With The 'Evil Illuminati'
First-Ever Masonic Inaugural Ball to be Held for Obama
Gangs of Iraq: military quietly enlisting thousands of active gang members
Overall, the Wiki article seemed most impartial and presented "just the facts"
I read the http://aftermathnews.wordpress.com/2...arming-theory/ link in some detail, because some of its viewpoints and attitudes were extreme enough to be amusing.
Their final statement shows that the have a political agenda and will not present both sides of the scientific argument dispassionately:
Does anyone still need further proof that anthropogenic Global Warming is a globalist scam to scare us into global government, deindustrialization and depopulation?
Naw, there isn't any sort of consensus.
First off, don't start saying I can't answer a question just because I don't respond to everyone of your inane, hard-to-read posts.So you cant answer the question. With this administration scientist who are advocates of man made global warming stand to receive federal funding I would assume, considering that the President and the Congress believe that way. If it plausible that Happer (who seems to be a respected scientist) is saying things to get paid (as you imply) is it no possible that others are as well?
Second, yeah, it's possible other researchers are on the take.....kind of like it's possible that a car will drive through my front car and kill me before I finish this sentence.....but which is more likely?
Answer me this simple little question if you're so convinced that researchers would lie for federal funding:
How much money is being allocated for climate research? What universities are getting it? How do they qualify? Seems to that you right-wingers like to muddy the waters with accusations but never really have any concrete numbers to back anything up....just more vague accusations that do nothing but divert the topic.
Your ignorance is painful to witness.....
I presented his senate testimony, instead of attacking his scientific finding you questioned his integrity. That is muddying the water.