Does it seem to you that global warming deniers think scientists are stupid?

The only feasible explanation for those doubters (not all of them, fit this bill) who hold such a low view of scientists (inferring either incompetence or intentional deception for monetary gain) are:

1) They are completely ignorant of science and the process of modern science (including the checks and balances provided in the world of peer reviewed scientific journals and conferences.

2) They themselves are unethical people who'd lie, cheat, or steel for personal gain, thus they conclude everyone else must be like that.

3) The Dunning-Kruger effect.

It's one thing to criticize popular media articles, op-ed pieces, personal blogs, or answers on Yahoo. It's quite another thing for laymen to dismiss, without any evidence, countless peer reviewed articles in respected journals that are well received by other experts in the field.

My take, Dana, with all honesty, is that you are not critical enough of the other scientists in your field and their theory. You must know that there is nothing wrong with denying a theory that observations don't support (AGW).

You are too trusting of the theory and I sometimes wonder why you don't see that temperature today is nothing out of the ordinary, and that radical wild variation in climate is perfectly natural.

I don't think scientists are stupid, in fact, quite the opposite. I think very smart people are capable of coming up with good reasons to support BAD theories, ESPECIALLY if certain outcomes mean that the funding of their research and jobs will continue.

The data really, really, really does NOT support a crisis at all. In a previous post you made clear that you EXPECT ever increasing disaster (food & water shortages, etc.)

I really think you should keep an open mind to what John Cristy and others are saying.

All the best to you.

Well... I'm a scientist by Oregon petition standards (I have a BS in biology). I suspect several, possibly many others are similarly qualified. And the patient explanations may not change the minds of the denialists, but they at least hopefully convince any confused children who wander by to lazyweb their homework.

I'm a so-called "denier", and I don't think scientists are stupid, just bought off by Al Gore & Co.

I don't believe they think the scientists are stupid, they think the scientists are corrupt and are following a secret agenda, to enable the government to impose "green" taxes or to massage Al Gore's ego, something like that!

They think that people like me are stupid for falling for it!

If there is no money making agenda involve maybe I will believe global warming but for now it's a big bussiness scam used by Algore.

Do you have any idea how much profit Algore got from that movie the inconvenient truth.

Scientists may not be stupid, but seriously mislead. The alarmists who follow them are the stupid ones.

Like any walk of life, science has differing opinions and people behind them. Do you think that scientists, in some cases, can't be bought? Of course they can...look at the IPCC for example. Hired, hand-picked by the UN and told what results are expected of their work. They're not stupid maybe, but are misleading themselves or being mislead for financial gain.

We can blame post modernism. It has taken its toll on the human knowledge quest by implanting the idea into the general public that there is no such thing as truth and that differing opinions are always equally valid approximations of an unknowable reality. It has helped to dismantle the authority of science, and has given shelter to fringe ideas lacking data.

Dana it is just that we want what you are unable to provide. And that is properly documented material that can be validated through proper scientific method. Every piece I have ever seen from any of you promoters is a published conclusion without the data stream that led to the conclusion. There is also no corroborating material from other researchers showing these theories to be testable and provable independently. Until such is shown no one who understands the basic rules of scientific testing will accept them as valid.

No, I don't think scientists are stupid, I just think if you truly believe they have all the answers about what happened during past climate changes when they couldn't observe it for themselves you're being a bit naive. Since I highly doubt they'd tell you we know exactly what caused the climate to change in the past. A scientist always qualifies their findings when they haven't observed things for themselves.

You are right, global warming deniers ALWAYS think scientists are stupid. Whenever you say "it's scientifically proven to be true", they don't even seem to understand what does it mean.

Whenever you see a deniers question, you WILL always see the words hoax, scam, Al Gore etc..

They don't even understand what does these sentences mean:

"EVERY major scientific organizations has an official statement that this is real, and caused by us."

"It is not based on faith to Al Gore, it's about science."

It's true, whatever you tell them, they WON'T understand it.

And they are the one who is stupid, not us scientists/global warming believers, because they can't REALLY feel the extreme heat,the rising of temperatures, and man made climate change!