Other Answers (11)

• The Oregon Petition list to which you%26#039;re referring is a PR effort, not any attempt to find out the strength of the consensus among climate scientists. It makes bold headlines about how many PhD%26#039;s signed their list, but they fail to mention that +95% (a generous estimate) of them have little or no experience in the field of climate science.
  
  In contrast, the authors list of the IPCC report lists the names and organizations of each author and contributor. You can easily find the credentials of the scientists there.
  
  Edit:
  kanzeiger - It doesn%26#039;t take a PhD in climate science to google OISM and see that their list of 31,000 names are most definitely NOT climate scientists. Go ahead and try it. I dare you ;-)
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oregon_Peti...
  http://environment.newscientist.com/chan...
  
  I also goggled the names antarcticice posted and he/she seems to be correct, %26#039;Jellinek%26#039; is a heart surgeon.
  And another I just goggled at random %26#039;Kermit L Like%26#039; is a Lt in the USAF
  The simple and saddest fact is the source of the petition the Oregon institute of Science %26amp; Medicine, it is nothing more than sheet metal warehouse run by 4-5 old guy way past retirement age like Arthur Robinson.
  http://www.oism.org/
  You would think for the first name position, they would at least pick someone who wasn%26#039;t pushing stupid science like intelligent design.
  
  (2) Randall L. Musselman, PhD, R. Musselman, PhD (same guy?)
  His area of expertise log-periodic dipole arrays (antennas)
  http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/Xplore/login....
  
  (3) Charles Lee Duncan, PhD
  Returns nothing in goggle but links back to the petition?
  
  (4) W. L. Wearly, PhD, William L. Wearly
  same old repeated name tricks
  http://www.mmsa.net/memaplistall.php3
  
  (5) Max Jellinek,, Ph.D. (a medical doctor)
  Asst-Assoc-Professor, 1961-1996
  http://surgery.slu.edu/index.phtml?page=...
  There seem to be quite a few M.D.s on this list.
  
  Interesting that names like John Christy and Willie Soon don%26#039;t seem to be on this list, you would think they would be at the top of the mailing list, if there were one!
  
  Ahhh Crazy con is dreamland a nice place
  %26quot;The IPCC refuses to release the fabled 2,500 names they like to throw around.
  http://www.ipcc.ch/ipccreports/ar4-wg2.h...
  Appendix II: Contributors to the IPCC WGII
  Fourth Assessment Report pages 17-30 lots of names and most seem to be linked to Universities and research groups and this is just working group II. If as you say they are refusing to release these names it would seem silly to print them at the end of the report like that?

• Answer hidden due to its low rating

  Having only Climatologists and Environmentalists would be a lot like talking to yourself, wouldn%26#039;t it?
  
  Climatologist: %26quot; What do you think about global warming Enviromentalist?%26quot;
  Enviromentalist: %26quot;Oh, I like it just fine. It pays the bills. How about you Climatologist?%26quot;
  Climatologist: %26quot; I like it too. Couldn%26#039;t make a living without it.%26quot;
  
  Excluding the scientists and engineers that actually have the skills to solve the supposed problem is ridiculous. The only reason to do that is if the problem is not real, or there is no real desire to fix it.

• Answer hidden due to its low rating

  I love how people here know the truth, and have no credentials, but these 31,000 other people, who are scientists, have no credibility.
  
  and the source being used to discredit them comes from a wiki on the page of a group whose survival depends on the continuation of the man-made global warming theory.
  
  Instead of the ad-hominems, why can%26#039;t we reason this question out?
  
  I come down squarely on the side of natural planetary warming primarily because our entire solar system is warming.
  
  But if you want to attack the people on various sides of the debate, how about a few jabs at the Council of Rome and Al %26quot;I invented the internet%26quot; Gore... he never stretches the truth after all.

• Answer hidden due to its low rating

  PR effort???? An inconvenient lie? NOW THAT%26#039;s A PR EFFORT!!! ROTFLMAO