So, because I find and post for example a science fact that shows there has been no warming for 15 or so years, it means I'm a conspiracy theorist? p.
I merely point out that you use the exact same type of non-scientific thinking that conspiracy theorists use.
Which is what, like when I find and point out something that says (for example) a small change in the Sun's EUV output can expand or shrink the upper atmosphere resulting in changes to air circulation patterns below?
And did you know that climate skeptics are generally more knowledgeable on climate science than skeptics? Might not be the case with me but in general, this is true. I think the claim that skeptics are more knowledgeable than you believers may even have been peer reviewed...
Fordama wrote: Plus you would have to believe in a conspiracy of scientists as well.
Given that 80% of the ozone measurements were either faked or incompletely done, it is not impossible that the small groups of scientists and researchers that track the world's historical temperature record could also be massaging their data.
And regarding their temperature data, it is a fact that scientists have lowered the older temp data and increased the newer temp data several times. And Michael Mann's hockey stick graph (according to Richard Muller in a MIT tech review article for one source) is an artifact of poor math.
So why should we trust it? Seems kind of odd to put a calibrated measuring device in a spot and then decide months, years or decades later that it wasn't really reading the right temperature. I know in some cases, there has been a valid reason for doing this such as when the white paint on the boxes covering the older thermometers decades ago faded away resulting in the boxes warming up more than they accounted for which biased the readings higher. This to me sounds like a valid adjustment (lowering the older data). But many of the adjustments aren't for this reason.
Combine that with your previous musings on other potential conspiracies and you start to look like a regular devotee of Alex Jones.
I read him everyday. Before you start foaming at the mouth, I only pay attention to the articles he posts that have credible links that actually back up what he says.
I also read motherjones, thenation, democracy now and a number of other left-wing sites regularly as well.
In my view, it is better to read the extreme news sources as well as the MSM news sources in order to get the most information.