[ExI] Fwd: 98% hoax

Jason Resch jasonresch at gmail.com
Sun Sep 4 19:16:35 UTC 2016

Here are some good sources:



On Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:16 PM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>

> Will someone in the group far more advanced than I am on this issue,
> refute this woman's opinion?  (I do notice that the article is from Forbes
> - an obvious industry arm)\
> bill w
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Mary Van Antwerp <mavah at aol.com>
> Date: Sun, Sep 4, 2016 at 1:09 PM
> Subject: 98% hoax
> To: foozler83 at gmail.com
> This article describes how they came to the conclusion that "98%" of
> scientists agree that man causes global warming. A two question, on line
> survey was sent to more than 10,000 scientist. The group that sent the
> survey then only used 77 of those scientists responses to the second
> question of which 75 answered "yes" and then "concluded" that 98% of
> scientists agree that man causes global warming. That's the number that was
> then used and still is to hold up the fear mongering arguments. The fact is
> that there is no scientific way to conclude whether humans can possibly be
> the primary contributing factor. And given the actual history of warming
> periods before the industrial revolution there are clearly many reasons for
> the alternating patterns of warming and cooling. People are entitled to
> their opinions, but when the scientists who say it's manmade get all the
> money from the government and the UN and those who dispute that are not
> only left out of the money but are vilified as nutcases (California is
> trying to introduce legislation to criminalize those who disagree with the
> idea...what does that say!!! Can you say "1984" a few years late?), it's
> fairly evident to me that there is a big game going on. A game that has
> made people like Al Gore very wealthy while nothing that he predicted has
> come to pass. All the ice was supposed to be gone by now according to that
> non-scientist politician who continues to own numerous homes that have been
> judged to be far from "green" and who jets around the world leaving his
> carbon footprint in his hypocritical wake wherever he goes. Meanwhile, the
> government gives all kinds of money not only to just certain scientists
> (the ones that will say what the government wants) but to companies
> claiming to have answers for renewable energy but that end up going
> bankrupt while their founders make off with taxpayer money in their
> pockets. The planet warms. It's warmed a tiny bit (less than a degree) and
> suddenly there's money to be made and power to be grabbed by claiming it's
> all our fault. And nothing sensible is done, like planting trees, stopping
> wholesale deforestation, etc. Just throw money at those who will support
> the government's agenda.
> http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scient
> ific-global-warming-consensus-not/#14d1c7db1690
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160904/3ef7a587/attachment.html>

More information about the extropy-chat mailing list