An opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal today signed by 16 prominent scientist dissent from the view that the evidence about global warming is incontrovertible. They write, " A candidate for public office in any contemporary democracy may have to consider what, if anything, to do about "global warming." Candidates should understand that the oft-repeated claim that nearly all scientists demand that something dramatic be done to stop global warming is not true. In fact, a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed."(link)
They go on to say, " The lack of warming for more than a decade—indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections—suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause. Faced with this embarrassment, those promoting alarm have shifted their drumbeat from warming to weather extremes, to enable anything unusual that happens in our chaotic climate to be ascribed to CO2."
I have been a global warming skeptic and a global warming believer and have vacillated back and forth and most often have only been slightly in the skeptic column or slightly in the believer column. I think it is still an open question if global warming is occurring, if it is man made and what if anything we should do about it. I do think there has been an effort to stifle descent in the scientific community and skeptics have been intimidated into silence.
Please read this article.These scientist are not local TV weathermen meteorologist or scientist in unrelated fields. These are prominent people. Nobel Prize-winning physicist Ivar Giaever is not a kook. My global warming belief meter dropped a little bit back toward the skeptic side. I do not think the science is settled.