Originally Posted by BucEyedPea
Why do some scientists disagree with you on GW? One is an atmospheric physicist who teaches meteorology at MIT —Richard Lindzen. Oh yeah, he was invited to give talks to some oil companies. But it was because he already disagreed not because he was paid to parrot big oil. Even he claims that there are "political pressures on climate scientists to conform to what he has called climate alarmism....He has long opposed the conventional consensus on global warming, pointing out that scientists are just as liable to err when the science appears to point in just one direction." (wiki)
BTW I do think there is warming but I don't think it's catastrophic. I think it's better for man than cooling. Longer growing seasons, less need for winter fuel.
Can we take Richard Lindzen as a starting point? I we call Lindzen's position a northward point of view and the consensus opinion of climate change a southern point of view, can we ignore any thought to the north of Lindzen to be unscientific? Can we agree on that much?