by frog
DeSmogBlog has published a rapidly growing list of outraged climate scientists – all of whom were listed on the Heartland Institute‘s “500 Scientists with Documented Doubts” statement after the climate change deniers conference in New York last March. Here are just three of the quotes on offer:
I am horrified to find my name on such a list. I have spent the last 20 years arguing the opposite.
Dr. David Sugden. Professor of Geography, University of Edinburgh
I have NO doubts ..the recent changes in global climate ARE man-induced. I insist that you immediately remove my name from this list since I did not give you permission to put it there.
Dr. Gregory Cutter, Professor, Department of Ocean, Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Old Dominion University
Please remove my name. What you have done is totally unethical!!
Dr. Svante Bjorck, Geo Biosphere Science Centre, Lund University
They followed up yesterday with another post, giving the names of three more scientists from the list who refuse to speak out against the Heartland Institute – because they are dead. Also in that post were a few imaginary friends of Heartland – scientists that don’t even exist.
I wonder if Muriel Newman is in fact real? I blogged about her earlier when she gushed in her Dom Post article ‘Climate change, we didn’t do it.‘, no doubt after conferring with some the the Heartland’s imaginary scientists. Maybe she’s just Rodney Hide’s imaginary friend?
Take a moment to enjoy this gem, referring to the conference as the Skeptic Tank:
Published in Environment & Resource Management | Media by frog on Fri, May 2nd, 2008
Tags: conference, denier, desmogblog, global warming, heartland institute, muriel newman, outrage, rodney hide, science, scientist
on the trolls and those who are unable to keep on topic
JEEEEEEEEEZZ
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As a ratio of for against where are we at? 455 to —?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
It is not so much the number as the fact that Heartland decided to construct a list based on their interpretation of the scientists’ research, *without* even asking these guys if they wanted to BE on the list.
I have no idea what the research was, but this is ridiculous.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
This man backs ACT (last election)
The Libertarian Wet Dream:
I’VE NEVER HAD A JOB MY ENTIRE LIFE…
“Why Would Anyone Agree to Work
40 Hours a Week, For 49 Weeks a Year-
When in ONE WEEK
You Can Do a Deal Worth $80,000-
http://tinyurl.com/3etmcw
PS Asset inflation isn’t wealth creation it just creates a charge elsewhere in the economy: Kurt Richenbauer.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
As one of the posters on desmogblog points out, Stefan Rahmstorf is on the Heartland List, but he has a website here:
http://www.pik-potsdam.de/~stefan/ where he has an article rubbishing climate skeptics!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Skeptic Tank is right!
They even include NIWA’s Dr Jim Salinger on their list, despite this from him in the NZ Herald:
NZ Herald: Are you a climate change believer or sceptic? Have you noticed any major changes in your time in weather forecasting and if so, what has been the most surprising?
Dr Jim Salinger: Climate has always changed over time. However, I agree with the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 4th Assessment Report. This has concluded that warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global mean sea levels. Most of the observed increase in globally averaged temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely due to the increase in greenhouse gas concentrations. Major changes I have noticed in my time in climate research have been the shrinkage of mountain glaciers in New Zealand and worldwide, the warming of temperatures and the decrease in frosts. [my emphasis].
These Heartland nutcases have just made most of it up!!!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
SALINGER?? keeeeryst.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
The trick, of course, is to identify scientists with doubts about the mechanisms of AGW then refer to this as doubts about the validity of human induced climate change. You could do the same thing with time or gravity. There doesn’t seem to be any scientific consensus how time or gravity actually work, but nobody actually denies that they exist. Except on the fringes of quantum theory where it’s often difficult to tell where an alternative universe ends and an alternative reality begins.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)
Might be on to something there Kevyn.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0 (0)