I'd like to just get an idea - how many of those denying anthropogenic climate change tend to reject science generally? That is to say, how many denialists also reject biological evolution and the Big Bang model of cosmology, and by extension, also implicitly reject most if not all of the findings of:
Geology
Chemistry
Physics
Archaeology
Astronomy
Cosmology
Biology
Paleontology
Et cetera
Well?
nonsense, biological evolution and the big bang actually have supporting evidence to back them up, unlike global warming.
Well, considering how many scientists from those fields reject the global warming hysteria, I would say MANY!
You alarmists are in denial. You deny the fact that your argument lacks any strong scientific validity and is based on a terribly weak correlation between temp and CO2 in the atmosphere. Correlation is a simple game to play, it's like polling.
Just because the climate change chicken littles claim to be scientists, doesn't mean they are scientists.
Climate change is hooey. Science is science, climate change science is politics.
I am a biologist, zoologist and ecologist as well as a property manager. I do not see complete scientific support for global warming caused by human activities. I do see support for global warming as a naturally occurring process. I also accept that human kinds pollution may have a deleterious effect on climate.
I really became skeptical when the politicians got involved. Al Gore and the likes are out to capitalize on the so called Green Revolution. We all know what a politician will do to make money.
Actually - global warming isn't a myth nor is climate change -
The myth is the CHICKEN LITTLE - the earth is in danger because of climate change. Al Gore is a total fraud. He won't debate anyone with an opposing view.
If you want to enlighten yourself go the the web site below where you'll actually see that the Arctic ice cap is now thickening and the oceans are in a cooling trend further indicating that there are natural ebb and flows of temperature and you know what - the earth has been a lot hotter and survived.
This doesn't mean that we don't need alternative fuels like coal, nuclear, solar and wind its just we don't need the Hollywood hype.
Climate change deniers only deny the science which doesn't mesh with their belief system. Or in the case of the few 'skeptical' scientists, when it's to their advantage. For example, most of the scientists 'skeptical' of global warming also coincidentally are 'skeptical' that CFCs cause ozone depletion, that secondhand smoke causes lung caner, and in some cases, they even deny evolution (see Roy Spencer).
Most deniers have no reason to deny biology (except maybe evolution) cosmology, astronomy, etc. They only deny climate science because its conclusions are inconvenient, requiring government action, conservation, and change in general. They don't deny it because they're anti-science, they deny it because they're afraid of change.