jahbrudda
Well-Known Member
Woops my butt, you constantly marginalize every source that does not fit your agenda, you only to read what you want to believe.Dr. Christy, agrees with the IPCC’s [2001] assessment that in the light of new evidence and taking into account remaining uncertainties, most of the observed warming over the last fifty years is likely to have been due to the increase in GHG concentrations."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Christy
he also works with roy spencer. who is roy spencer?
Spencer is a signatory to An Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming,[SUP][24][/SUP][SUP][25][/SUP] which states that "Earth and its ecosystems – created by God's intelligent design and infinite power and sustained by His faithful providence – are robust, resilient, self-regulating, and self-correcting".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Spencer_(scientist)
woooo0o0oooo0ooooo000000ooo0oo0oo0ops.
Stating he signed an evangelical declaration is immaterial, a distraction used all the time by partisans, you're nothing new.
It's a typical democrat ploy that's failed for years, magicians use this slide of hand tactic to distract the house as well.
Oh, and how ironic of you to use Wikipedia on a political issue as your citation.
[h=1]Study: Wikipedia perpetuates political bias [/h]
Wikipedia was founded on the notion the Internet is a self-correcting machine: by harnessing collective intelligence through an open-source platform, the facts will ultimately come to light. But a new study shows that collective intelligence generally produces biased information, except in a narrow range of circumstances. Northwestern’s Shane Greenstein and the University of Southern California’s Feng Zhu analyzed a decade’s worth of Wikipedia articles on U.S. politics and found that only a handful of them were politically neutral. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/study-wikipedia-perpetuates-political-bias/2012/06/18/gJQAaA3llV_blog.html
You really need more practice at this.