Originally Posted by
todd1200
Jungle, can you find any nationally or internationally accredited scientific organiztions that refute the reality of man-made global warming? I believe even the American Association of Petroleum Geologists has abandoned the skeptical camp. I know there are plenty of bloggers who advocate any stance a person could dream up, but are there any legitimate scientific groups that claim that human activity does not contribute to long-term global warming? I don't mean those who acknowledge the complex nature of weather patterns and the uncertainty inherent in the analysis of such complex systems; I mean groups that so fiercely deny the possibility of global warming.
I am not sure the boys and hot chicks in lab coats at the AAPG say what you think they say:
http://dpa.aapg.org/gac/statements/climatechange.cfm
AAPG supports expanding scientific climate research into the basic controls on climate specifically including the geological, solar, and astronomic aspects of climate change. Research should include understanding causes of past climate change and the potential effects of both increasing and decreasing temperatures in the future. This research should be undertaken by appropriate agencies involved in climate research and their associated grant and contract programs.
Certain climate simulation models predict that the warming trend will continue, as reported through National Academy of Sciences, American Geophysical Union, American Academy for the Advancement of Science, and American Meteorological Society. AAPG respects these scientific opinions but wants to add that the current climate warming projections could fall within well-documented natural variations in past climate and observed temperature data. These data do not necessarily support the maximum-case scenarios forecast in some models.
AAPG supports research to narrow probability ranges on the effect of anthropogenic CO2 on global climate. • AAPG supports reducing emissions from fossil fuel use as a worthy goal. (However, emission reduction has an economic cost, which must be compared to the potential environmental gain).
AAPG supports the premise that economies must retain their vitality if they are to be able to invest in alternative energy sources as fossil fuels become more expensive.
AAPG supports the pursuit of economically viable technology to sequester carbon dioxide emissions and emissions of other gases in a continuing effort to improve our environment and enhance energy recovery. • AAPG supports measures to conserve energy.
I find nothing wrong in this statement. If you dont either than Doctor Mann (and N2264J) would label you a denier.
Ask yourself this question. Do you consider the debate settled? If so doesnt that make you the denier?