Quote Originally Posted by Ker_Thwap View Post
I'll bite. Careful not to read into that graph more than it actually states. First, no one vaguely intelligent is arguing that man is not impacting the climate at all. It's inconceivable that 7 billion people aren't impacting the climate in some manner. What's being debated is the degree of change, and if it's "bad" or not.

That not so clever graph merely points out that a bunch of studies concluded some degree of change. It lumps the studies that predict a .5% change which impacts no one in any meaningful manner in with the studies that predict a 900% change and we're all going to die. When you lump such wildly varying studies under a single umbrella, you lose point of the purpose of the studies.

Science is awesome, but stop abusing statistics to make your political points. That goes for everyone on both sides of the aisle.

This search he did was to answer a simple question: is there controversy about the reality of ACC? If there is, we'll find papers about it. The specifics/extent are beyond the scope of the question. You say no one vaguely intelligent argues this... I see people arguing this all the time. Am I to assume that those people are all idiots?