UN IPCC scientist Eduardo Zorita publicly declared that his Climategate colleagues Michael Mann and Phil Jones "should be barred from the IPCC process...They are not credible anymore."

And speaking of smart people you might want to look at David Evans while remember he has a very solid background in statistics (a M.S.). And, of course statistics is the base tool that the hoaxers used, to claim the rapid onset of MMGW. Of course they left out the Medieval Warming Period. It was just so inconvenient.

You also hit upon the major problem causing the climate upheaval, namely grotesque worldwide overpopulation -- an underlying ongoing cause which will always trump the minor reductions in fossil fuel use that some countries applaud themselves for having achieved.

But if you can have organized boosters then you certainly should be able to have organized deniers.

And you don't have to be against wind, solar, etc just because you think MMGW is a hoax. The problem is that electricity generated by solar is around 300% more expensive than coal. Yet government is backing companies to produce a technology that has no market unless government skews the picture. Of course it doesn't hurt if the corp's main dude was one of the President's main bundlers.

Wind power is even more unreliable than solar so a carbon based backup source is required. That means an expensive and environmentally destructive overlay of the distribution system.

And if you really are worried about population explosions then worry about the third world populations in Africa and the Middle East which right now are stressing Europe's ability to remain Europe.

People will leave carbon based power when its replacement's cost doesn't cost an arm an a leg.

In the meantime, drill like crazy and research like crazy.

Of course there are some uninformed lackey's of the United Nations and George Soros who also have degrees in such things as "How to BS the world and travel FC to meetings in exotic places."

As for "denier," I merely ask for proof and see a lot of smoke and mirrors by politicians in the universities and UN agencies.

My background is engineering. Once upon a time I actually had a business card that said I was one. But I sold out to the commercial side and became a.....gasp..... sales type. And now I can't find my slide rule... but I still can think logically.

Comedy gold, Jerry, comedy gold...

more vehement in their attacks against the believers than the believers were against the non-believers

Spanish inquisition  -- Bloody Mary

pfft
 me! bubble boy.  great test.

I scored a 14 so I guess I'm not in a bubble - according to the test.

What Murray seems to assume is that exposure will yield empathy.

Also, lost on the military service question since I have not been in the military, and I do not have a spouse.

I think any honest person would have to say there is not a more informed and articulate spokesperson for the advocacy of the social safety net with the political genius to use it in a debate than the president.

Hmmm..I can think of 2 right off the top of my head that would be more informed and more articulate spokespeople for the advocacy of the social safety net with the political genius to use it in a debate than the president.

The most obvious, of course, is Bill Clinton.

many of his uninformed supporters believe this about the debate also.

we simply disagree about who would win the country as a result of the debate.

bring it.  as they say.

I also think, knowing several republicans, there are actually lots of people who are republicans who are not morons.  I know this goes against the conventional wisdom but its true.   if I was one of them I think would say this - 'Romney is going to lose.possibly as bad as Newt. and he is creepy.
Newt will at least allow us to lose with principals"