Reply to comment

It's that the jury came back and reached a verdict. Sure, you can appeal it all you want but the fact remains that - in several courts of science, global warming is happening and it is largely because of humans. Guilty.

Now when you say "there is plenty of evidence" yet cite none, it says to me you haven't bothered structuring your rebuttle to be iron clad. Nor have your invested the time to research these pieces of evidence - else one would assume they would be right there at your fingertips, ready to be hauled out as shinning, gleaming examples of "proof".

Additionally, when a prestigious science prize goes to someone for their work and you say it is political, that seems like sour grapes - or worse - a walk down conspiracy lane.

You can be a skeptic, or a person not persuaded - I would gladly count myself among those - but you shouldn't push your agenda under the guise of "scientific doubt" - it is kinda insulting to the likes of Galileo and Copernicus.

When every new weather/sea ice/temperature metric comes out it adds another brick to the theroy of global warming. That is a lot of data to be against - one should have more than just innuendo and sarcasm when trying to tear it down.

Eric