ace....the fun is watching you squirm and dodge any real discussion of the facts around the scientific consensus and put the blame everywhere but on yourself. (if you are honest with yourself, you would recognize that you are an anthropomorphic contributor
to the deterioration of the discussion here as much as anyone.)
How many times must this be repeated to sink in?
The consensus is clear and unambiguous as expressed by the overwhelimg majority of climate scientists at the IPCC, the majority of scientists represented by 11 National Acadamies of Sciences around the world, as well as the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) and other credible scientific bodies.
You can continue to cherry pick scientists that disagree (Christy is one of the small number of dissenting voices within the IPCC), supported by articles you post that misrepresent the facts..... but that doesnt change the overwhelming consensus.
When you can point to ANY credible national or international scientific body that disputes the consensus, THEN you may have a leg to stand on and cause for further discussion.
Unitl then, carry on if you think it makes your self-proclaimed CLOSE MINDED position stronger or more credible.
