Ah, the Joy of Settled Science

Since many advocates of anthropomorphic global warming theory have declared the twenty-year-old science to be "settled," then there must not be very much controversy or disagreement in the peer review reader comments to the UN's Fourth IPCC report.  Except, no one seems willing to publicize these comments.  Even US government organizations paid for by taxpayers.  Steve McIntyre is again having to resort to filing FOIA's to get the details of climate research.

Update: It appears that Congress is taking a similar approach to climate research when it comes to openness about earmarks.

  • delurking

    anthropo...what?

  • http://www.uncsense.com Richard Nikoley

    Warren:

    I think it's time for a big Post-It note on your monitor.

    AnthropoGENIC. AntropoGENIC. AnthropoGENIC. Think: Genesis; to create.

  • Mesa EconoGuy

    I’m actually a practitioner of arthropogenic warming/catastrophe:

    http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002iaf..confE.140H

    That said, it seems to me (not sure if I got this from here or not) that the entire argument about “controlling” global warming relies almost entirely on economic direction, rationing, and outright prohibition, which won’t work.

    Even if “man-made global warming” is real (which it apparently isn’t), why do these highly enlightened scientists like Sheryl Crow insist on utilizing pseudo-economic means to attempt to control emissions?

    That goes against 300 years of settled economics. It won’t work. The debate is over.