The oil industry copied the tactics [of] the tobacco industry. Engender mistrust in the science and scientists by lying.
What a devilishly clever piece of logic. It cannot fail, can it? The one fly in its little pot of ointment is that sceptical doubts about dangerous anthropogenic global warming (DAGW) don’t arise from suspicion of science or scientists, they arise from observation and reasoning.
For example, why is there no cogent description of a process by which radiative atmospheric effects substantially heat the ocean? This is not an emanation from my creative imagination, there really and actually is no description of it. If there is, please tell me where to find it. Without it, global warming cannot be dangerous.
Why do some scientists assert that human activities MUST have contributed to warming ONLY BECAUSE they have found no other cause of warming? It’s not a scientific approach to pick a cause, any cause, just because you haven’t found one.
Why do scientists tell us that global mean surface temperature has been rising abnormally, when there’s been no significant warming, according to the satellite studies, for about 20 years?
It’s tiresome being constantly lectured on the imaginary causes of our doubts.
I presume people like Dennis are happy that the atmosphere heats the ocean, so I’d be interested in how you imagine it happens. It’s not a minor point, because it’s the only way that sea level might be raised by our emissions, and sea level rise is the biggest threat posed by the global warming threat.
It’s very strange that science so far is silent on the mechanism.
It’s beyond strange that the IPCC is silent on this; in fact, it encroaches upon the fraudulent.