Why? Because not everyone is sucking on IPCC's teats when they go about their business of purposly trying to 1) "prove" there is climate change instead testing whether there is one or not and 2) pin it on mankind rather than examining if any other factors may be invovled, like, ya know, that big glowing ball in the sky which dwarfs everything we do to parts of billions?Anonymouse said:
IPCC is not a homogenous body of scientists where everyone is involved in everything. They are also not homogenous in that they don't all agree with eachother. When it came to climate change and mankind's part in it, of the 2500 people that make up IPCC, only 62 had actually reviewed the chapter that claimed mankind is responsible for the perceived climate change. And of these 62, not all agreed and thought the report failed the review (shush!!!)... and a big bunch of them had a vested interest in claiming mankind is to blame. All in all we were left with only a handful of scientists with any kind of credibility left who claimed this. That's 5 in 2500.
Not-alarmed cat is not alarmed.
Personally I think combustion is bloody stupid, no matter if it's coal, oil, gas, garbage, pet or wood we're burning because combustion gases are BAD in that they kill 2 million people every year. We need to get all that shite replaced. Prefereably with nuclear because that's the only thing that can compete in volume, safety, price and reliability and thus constitutes the most attractive option to those that make the decisions.
/S
