Do global warming 'skeptics' necessarily have an aversion to scientific data?

Favorite Answer

I think this is partly the case. I also think that the deniers of global warming do so out of political beliefs and religious convictions, and also due to the basic problem that global warming is not a simple subject.
Sport utility vehicles have up until recently been immensely profitable for Detroit to make. Suggesting that they contribute to warming by emissions is bad for the auto industry's profits, in much the same way that increasing the CAFE standard is - increased fuel efficiency means less v-10's and less luxury options.
"McMansions" are good bets for the construction industry. Any notion that suggests that less is sometimes better attacks this industry's profits.
The poorly understood concept of stewardship of the Earth. The notion that the Earth is merely here for us to exploit and consume.
The complexity of global climate. This issue does not lend itself to sound bites well. Many factors contribute to global warming - not all of them man made, and not all to the same degree. Even in the absence of political bias, the potential to misunderstand the problem is great....Show more

oh ya show us a chart from nasa giss.
James Hansen is a tree hugger from way back plus he claimed in the 70s that we were going into a ice age.

go to this site and see how the AGW people change the data to fit AGW.
http://www.climateaudit.org/
we don't believe the data because the data is not PURE it has been altered by the same people that are pushing AGW.
and the climateaudit web site shows how they do it.

When you have weather data that has to be adjusted because the weather collection sites are badly placed and then a known treehugger like James Hansen does the adjustment.
how can you trust the data
its like a prisoner in prison guarding the prison.

part 1 of your question
there are more then a few sites that are bad a large number of weather recording sites are bad
and the AGW people know they are bad and they use the adjustments to inflate the temp even more.

part 2 claiming that CO2 levels are rising based on levels from a observatory in Hawaii when it is a volcano observatory on a active volcano.
then don't back it up with reading from other places around the world that are not on volcano's.
there has to be many sites that take CO2 reading around the world.
don't tell me that there are not instruments in other places.
because i worked in the chemical industry and the mining industry. as a safety man and used to check CO2 levels on a daily bases.

part 3
no one has proven that the sun is not the cause all they claim is they can find no evidence that it does.
lack of evidence does not prove a fact.
all it proves is that they could not find evidence.

part 4
evidence from a known treehugger like James Hansen proves nothing
the fact that he has made over a million dollars in awards speaking fees and grants from the environmental movement.
makes his evidence suspect.

we look at ALL the data and the source of the data , how the data was taken. and who used the data and how.
AND the BACKGROUND of the PEOPLE involved....Show more

Skeptics in general LOVE scientific data. Unfortunately, they tend to only pick and choose data sets that support their arguments. Even if only 5% of the data available supports their contentions....Show more

I would like to know where people are getting their misinformation. I think they do a search on the internet and find the "skeptics" point of view and hold it at equal footing with mainstream scientific opinion. They themselves don't understand the science, so they assume there is a 50-50 debate, or that it's a big made up conspiracy since there are so many skeptic web pages with debunked and outdated info....Show more

Do you have an aversion to scientific data?
http://www.middlebury.net/op-ed/global-w...
http://www.exploratorium.edu/climate/cryosphere/data2.html
http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Calen7/MornerEng.html
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs/Fig.C.txt...Show more