Are Louisiana AGW sceptics going about business as normal tomorrow?

I wonder how many hurricanes are going to hit New Orleans like bowling balls before conservatives notice that something is up.

It used to be Florida that got all the big hurricanes, but even then Miami and Orland were never completely destroyed.

You make a lot of good points, but you are making a false assumption. Skeptics do not believe that there is a 90% or even a high probability that humans activity will cause catastrophic warming.

There are also scientists who are saying that human activity will not cause catastrophic warming. I just happen to find the scientists who claim otherwise more credible. You do not, and you are entitled to your opinion as I am to mine. (The reason have been repeated so often in the past, no need to repeat)

One thing that I find strange is that we keep hearing how scientific and public opinion all say that global warming is a concern. But according to believers us tiny minority of skeptics hold so much political power that we are preventing measures from being taken to fight climate change.

Oh dear, Adam C is picking on me again, i just don't think i can go on knowing he dislikes me, as a AGW naysayer...but I will comment anyway-as everyone knows, you would like to be able to link GW with Gustav...unfortunately with even your flaming acceptance of Algorism, you are not so ignorant(hopefully) to suggest that this is the case, so instead, you make some silly reference to the probability of a hit on 'nawlins', but your comparison is once again not applicable to the situation-of course we should get out of harms way, funny, i would have thought you might want to comment on the potential harm to endangered plants and animals, but instead you use a very serious storm and the potential for loss of human life to make a very obtuse point-too bad, but typical of the pro-AGW posts on this site-remember, if you cannot say anything constructive, the least you can do is shut up!

i don't be responsive to approximately all this medical mumbo jumbo which does no longer galvanize me lots, yet from the place I take a seat, I genuinely have well-known as a results of fact i grew to become right into a new child that if I fill a tumbler crammed with water, then throw a handful of ice cubes in it, it rather is going to initially overflow, yet as quickly because it settles and that i enable it set in one day; the ice melts, yet not extra overflow happens. i be responsive to of no actual clarification why it rather is, notwithstanding if it stands to reason that the comparable could be actual if all the ice cap have been to soften. There could be no overflow. The molecules could by some potential study to evolve to the ambience they are in. i could rather prefer to work out some brainiac arise with a clarification why ice-soften does not boost the quantity of water in a tumbler already finished to the brim.

Um, as a matter of fact, after Katrina, the state of LA has made better preperations for the hurricane, "just in case". They have had mandotory evalcuations since last Sat. and now they have arrest warrants out for the people who decide to stay, and if they come out of their house.

Whether or not what is technically the storm will hit land, there will be high winds and torrential downpours, with 100% certainty.

In other words your analogy is just a WEE bit off.

Probably. Denial is that way.

For the umpteenth time speakeasy, the 31,000 scientists were comprised of people who only needed a bachelors degree in a field related to a science discipline. Of the 31,000 "scientists" only 40 were climate scientists. This is the grand total of climate scientists these right wingers were able to come up with in over ten years of trying. The rest of the "scientists" were anything from dentists, medical doctors to metallurgists.

Get a clue!

Over 30,000 scientists have signed a petition insisting man is not the cause of the warming cycle that began at the end of the last Ice Age, 18,000 years ago.

It is politicians who have a 'consensus' that man is the cause, thereby justifying carbon taxes to seize wealth. Scientists disagree very strongly on this issue.

But then, your suggestion that someone doubting the validity of one prediction should also doubt the validity of another, thereby remaining in a storm's path, is also not scientifically sound. It is false logic.

So now we decide science by consensus? Either it is or it isn't. It doesn't get decided by a bunch of scientists.

Billions of deaths ??? The way I see it , warming over the last 150 years has resulted in humanities largest population increase . Not a massive die off .