Have you noticed that liberals cite scientific organizations on man made GW while cons cite organizations like

Question

"global warming heartland", and political organizations like the CATO, Heritage, and CATO created junkscience.com?

I posted a website from NASA stating that the majority of climatoligists support man made global warming, but they still won't believe it.

They'll say that actually most scientists don't believe it, but then provide no evidence of that.

Can conservatives name even three SCIENTIFIC ORGANIZATIONS against man made global warming?

Nice,

Name one well established scientific organization against man made global warming.

PD,

Sort of correct. They refused to believe it, but then members started to complain, and I think they are starting to change their stance.

Answer 1

How about:

Global Change Researchers Assess Projections of Climate Change

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eos Vol. 76, No. 18, May, 2 1995, pp. 185, 189-90. © 1995 American Geophysical Union. Permission is hereby granted to journalists to use this material so long as credit is given, and to teachers to use this material in classrooms.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Eric J. Barron,
Chair, Forum on Climate Modeling, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park

-or-

Global Warming: The Origin and Nature of the Alleged Scientific Consensus
Richard S. Lindzen
Richard S. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

-or-

WMO Report Cites Uncertainties About
Greenhouse Gas Sources, Sinks
Copyright 1998 Bureau of National Affairs
Daily Environment Report (February 12, 1998)


I could list more if you like, but the point is made. You have cited a webite, I have cited three peer reviewed articles.

Your turn.

Answer 2

In his new book, The Assault on Reason, Al Gore pleads, "We must stop tolerating the rejection and distortion of science. We must insist on an end to the cynical use of pseudo-studies known to be false for the purpose of intentionally clouding the public's ability to discern the truth." Gore repeatedly asks that science and reason displace cynical political posturing as the central focus of public discourse.
If Gore really means what he writes, he has an opportunity to make a difference by leading by example on the issue of global warming.
A cooperative and productive discussion of global warming must be open and honest regarding the science. Global warming threats ought to be studied and mitigated, and they should not be deliberately exaggerated as a means of building support for a desired political position.
Many of the assertions Gore makes in his movie, ''An Inconvenient Truth,'' have been refuted by science, both before and after he made them. Gore can show sincerity in his plea for scientific honesty by publicly acknowledging where science has rebutted his claims.
For example, Gore claims that Himalayan glaciers are shrinking and global warming is to blame. Yet the September 2006 issue of the American Meteorological Society's Journal of Climate reported, "Glaciers are growing in the Himalayan Mountains, confounding global warming alarmists who recently claimed the glaciers were shrinking and that global warming was to blame."
Gore claims the snowcap atop Africa's Mt. Kilimanjaro is shrinking and that global warming is to blame. Yet according to the November 23, 2003, issue of Nature magazine, "Although it's tempting to blame the ice loss on global warming, researchers think that deforestation of the mountain's foothills is the more likely culprit. Without the forests' humidity, previously moisture-laden winds blew dry. No longer replenished with water, the ice is evaporating in the strong equatorial sunshine."
Gore claims global warming is causing more tornadoes. Yet the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change stated in February that there has been no scientific link established between global warming and tornadoes.
Gore claims global warming is causing more frequent and severe hurricanes. However, hurricane expert Chris Landsea published a study on May 1 documenting that hurricane activity is no higher now than in decades past. Hurricane expert William Gray reported just a few days earlier, on April 27, that the number of major hurricanes making landfall on the U.S. Atlantic coast has declined in the past 40 years. Hurricane scientists reported in the April 18 Geophysical Research Letters that global warming enhances wind shear, which will prevent a significant increase in future hurricane activity.
Gore claims global warming is causing an expansion of African deserts. However, the Sept. 16, 2002, issue of New Scientist reports, "Africa's deserts are in 'spectacular' retreat . . . making farming viable again in what were some of the most arid parts of Africa."
Gore argues Greenland is in rapid meltdown, and that this threatens to raise sea levels by 20 feet. But according to a 2005 study in the Journal of Glaciology, "the Greenland ice sheet is thinning at the margins and growing inland, with a small overall mass gain." In late 2006, researchers at the Danish Meteorological Institute reported that the past two decades were the coldest for Greenland since the 1910s.
Gore claims the Antarctic ice sheet is melting because of global warming. Yet the Jan. 14, 2002, issue of Nature magazine reported Antarctica as a whole has been dramatically cooling for decades. More recently, scientists reported in the September 2006 issue of the British journal Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society Series A: Mathematical, Physical, and Engineering Sciences, that satellite measurements of the Antarctic ice sheet showed significant growth between 1992 and 2003. And the U.N. Climate Change panel reported in February 2007 that Antarctica is unlikely to lose any ice mass during the remainder of the century.
Each of these cases provides an opportunity for Gore to lead by example in his call for an end to the distortion of science. Will he rise to the occasion? Only time will tell.

Answer 3

There is a lot of published science in reputable scientific journals refuting man-made global warming.

I myself am a scientist and I think the science is weak.

The majority of scientists once believed the earth was flat, and was the centre of the universe.

Answer 4

Global warming is a problem and this must be considered seriously but not termed as a myth.

Answer 5

There aren't any because they don't get any funding like the other retards. MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING, NOT TRUE!! all propaganda! i guess if u were smart you would know that. unfortunately not many people are. or you know what...they are smart but won't look at the other side of the argument.

nice Patrick G, this guy is retarded.

Answer 6

No, I haven't noticed that.

I did notice, however, that you are asking for people to provide multiple citations to support their stance, while you decline to do the same.

Answer 7

no i had not noticed that and my choice of presidential candidate is not affected by that. WHAT IT WAS AFFECTED BY WAS RESULTS AND THE LAST RESULTS OF THE LAST LIBERAL CANDIDATE, CLINTON, IN THE WHITE HOUSE, MADE UP MY MIND FOR ME TO VOTE CONSERVATIVE.

- The only president ever impeached on grounds of personal malfeasance
- Most number of convictions and guilty pleas by friends and associates*
- Most number of cabinet officials to come under criminal investigation
- Most number of witnesses to flee country or refuse to testify
- Most number of witnesses to die suddenly
- First president sued for sexual harassment.
- First president accused of rape.
- First first lady to come under criminal investigation
- Largest criminal plea agreement in an illegal campaign contribution case
- First president to establish a legal defense fund.
- First president to be held in contempt of court
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions
- Greatest amount of illegal campaign contributions from abroad
- First president disbarred from the US Supreme Court and a state court
i believe actions speak louder than words and these results speak voilumes.

Answer 8

I don't care if every single last climatologist "supports" it. Until there is something resembling irrefutable proof, it remains nothing more than an unproven hypothesis.

An assertion that climate change is caused by my daily intake of Cheese Whiz is just as valid, as neither have so much as one iota of irrefutable scientific proof to back them up.

Answer 9

Did notice that, yes.

Scientific organizations do not support the cult-like ideas of rabbid conservatives, hence their lack of support for them.

Answer 10

actually, there is one scientific organization that refutes it:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists

(but it is the only one)