Why is it that AGW proponents reference NOAA, NASA, NAS...and AGW skeptics/deniers reference Michael Savage...?

I have never heard anyone reference Michael Savage. This question is designed to attack without credibility and is the method used by liberals and the believers.

You really shouldn't overgeneralize... Besides, what difference the source if the information is correct? That's a tactic out of Alinsky's Rules For Radicals - "ridicule your opponent".. Real science by real scientists... Dr. Roy Spencer has published his peer-reviewed research that indicates the assumptions the IPCC models make regarding CO2 and cloud formation are incorrect, making the models overly sensitive. Videos of Dr. Spencer’s presentation Links to Dr. Spencer’s website and peer-reviewed Journal of Climate paper. http://www.drroyspencer.com/research-articles/satellite-and-climate-model-evidence/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/Spencer-and-Braswell-08.pdf http://www.drroyspencer.com/research-articles/ http://www.drroyspencer.com/

Yours is the first reference to Michael Savage I've seen in this forum. So, I guess my question is, why do alarmists so frequently argue with bad logic, like the strawman argument, guilt by association and fallacious appeals to authority?

To be fair, deniers sometimes do reference Roy Spencer. And while he's got a pretty bad history of data analysis and is an intelligent design proponent, his ideas still merit scientific scrutiny. Also to be fair, Roy Spencer is basically the only climate scientist who deniers ever reference. Every so often you get a Lindzen reference as well, but he's no better than Spencer, frankly. We all know that deniers deny AGW for political reasons and not on scientific grounds. Some of them will even go so far as to admit it. http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AsvgW.yxjm.fll_aeYxXNQfsy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20090604123526AAHC8to For those who claim the science is on their side, their use of political websites and lack of scientific evidence reveals their true motivation.

In another question, Peter just said the earth spins completely once every 12 hrs so take his answer with a grain of salt, red. Obviously you know why they quote media pundits instead of climatologists. No actual climatologists deny AGW.

Interesting that Jimmbbo references Roy Spencer, a creationist: http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=080805I and someone with a tight communication link with Rush Limbaugh: http://www.desmogblog.com/rush-limbaugh-falls-for-global-warming-hoax Beyond all that, Spencer's worst trait is his scientific track record and his ability to over-rely on flawed data to make dubious conclusions regarding climate models. To answer your question, global warming denial is about politics. There are few credible peer-reviewed scientific references for them to cite.

Actually this has a nice two part answer. BTW, I am not a cool aid drinker 1. Those sources you mentioned are govt sources. Due to politics and funding they are required to "tow the party line". 2. I, as a non-cool aid drinker, refernce data from NOAA, NASA and others regularly. I do not take any oposition to their data. I take oposition the the editorializing. If you talk to the employees who write the documents rather than refer to what is published you actually get the truth vs. the party line.

How do you know they don't study climate change?

Tch, tch, tch, you forgot that font of peer reviewed science research, YOUTUBE. i just don't know what to make of your question. i mean, if you miss the most important resource of all, i'm afraid that puts the entire content of the question in doubt. and, of course, there's Mr Cheese (limburger, that is). oh, oh, and the "You can see russia from my house" governor. i'm afraid the quality of questions is slipping around these parts. maybe what we need to do is mount some internet access in the monkey house at the zoo. that'll surely improve the content -- at least in this section. thanks, and have a good day y'all. edit: Hey, i went to my tarot reader the other day. she said (they're always "she's" aren't they) that i better stock up on winter jackets. i'd post a link, but (a) it was a verbal warning, and (b) her predictions are copyright, so i can't do that. i'm probably not supposed to be telling everyone -- i sure hope she doesn't notice. anyway, after i get done here, i'm going down to the winter jacket store. her sister owns it, and i'm told that the ones she has are, by far, the best available. i think i'll get the humvee model. it's the biggest, baddest, jacket in town. it'll run right over most other jackets. and, with a jacket that'll run over just about anything on the sidewalk, i'm sure it'll attract all the girls. i just can't wait to see all the attention i'll be getting. i'll get back to you and let you know. i hear they're starting a mail order business, in case you really understand the future, like i do. i just can't wait to see all those dum liberals freezing their tushes off down in Miami Beech, while i'm wearing my humvee jacket. maybe i should go down, and open up an ice skate and tire chain shop, cause the global cooling is pro'ly gonna make the sea ice extend down that far. .