those that offer speculative analysis, and in so doing are "anti science" for daring to differ, what are some of the opinions here from all you climatologists that are rationally part of the scientific consensus

"Recent observed global warming is significantly less than that simulated by climate models. This difference might be explained by some combination of errors in external forcing, model response and internal climate variability."

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/ ... ATE-201309

What we have going on here is an attempt at intellectual pollution.
If you even think of thinking differently about the issue you are "anti science"
If you dare to familiarize yourself with literature that is not disseminated by the general consensus, you are ostracized by the scientific consensus that is always right and fighting the "good fight"

WE CARE MORE
WE WANT OUR CHILDREN'S CHILDREN TO HAVE A PLANET TO LIVE ON
WE ARR PRO SCIENCE AND YOU ARE NOT BECAUSE THERE ARE MORE OF US THAN YOU

Groupthink in progress and not even aware of it.

"Group members try to minimize conflict and reach a consensus decision without critical evaluation of alternative viewpoints, by actively suppressing dissenting viewpoints, and by isolating themselves from outside influences."

Wiki

I am willing to bet that most of you are simply placing your bets on a "better safe than sorry" guess and have NOT seriously evaluated alternative views as they become available.

and I cant blame anyone because this is some highly complex shit that most you dont really understand.
What I dont appreciate is people mouthing off loosely and saying that if you arent on board with global warming you are anti science.

I like Interbane. But I dont like the way he thinks.

I am willing to bet that most of you are simply placing your bets on a "better safe than sorry" guess and have NOT seriously evaluated alternative views as they become available.

I am placing my bets on a better safe than sorry guess, and yet I do seriously consider alternative viewpoints. Which alternative viewpoint is the most viable, in your opinion? I will give it my honest to goodness unbiased full attention.

WE CARE MORE
WE WANT OUR CHILDREN'S CHILDREN TO HAVE A PLANET TO LIVE ON

Why do you do this ant? You said my motivation was political. It's not political. My motivation to figure out whether or not climate change is real, and whether or not we're causing it, has to do with my concern for the future. I never said I cared more than you do.

If you want political motive, check out the link in my original post in this thread. The carbon industry has a lot of money, and they use it to fund political campaigns.

I like Interbane. But I dont like the way he thinks.

This is strange. I like the way I think, but I don't like myself, and prozac doesn't seem to help the latter.