Leo

Put another way, there are something like 30,000 climate scientists, very few are skeptical.

So we have Carter's views standing against thousands of scientists; hence my comment your fallaciously of appealing to authority.

We know you have great ability to hold nonsense views, having suggested that a major study on Oceans does not comprise science.

http://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/2016-046_0.pdf

Dan

Permafrost thaws when temperature is high for a long period, a few extremely hot days makes no difference to it thawing.
Thawing of permafrost in Siberia is becoming a major problem.

The flea says:” here are something like 30,000 climate scientists, very few are skeptical.”
Do you have a source for this, flea, or is it just the guess of an unqualified ignoramus?
Carter gave a careful, resoursed statement of the science. Neither you, nor any one else has put forward any scientific or rational basis to show him to be other than completely correct.
Comments by fraud promoters, like yourself and bigmouth, have been untruthful, or,at best, incorrect.
Carter is the climate expert who has shown the “consensus" pseudoscience to be baseless, without any scientific validity, and you make the ignorant assertion that he is not an expert on climate. Only the U>S Senate, and a court of law dealing with a question of climate accept him as an expert. An unqualified ignoramus, like you, asserts that he is not a climate expert.
I remind you that I have on numerous occasions invited you to submit anything which would show that you are not unqualified or not an ignoramus, and you have failed to do so, so I have accepted that as confirmation of my assertion.
If I made a criticism of an ocean study, it would have been specific, and obviously yo cannot answer i, so you suggest that I said something which I did not. Only to be expected from an unqualified, fraud supporting ignoramus.

A little summary of some recent climate related news

Timeline of Earth's Average Temps since Glaciation
http://xkcd.com/1732/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-14/study-warns-future-heatwaves-could-devastate-inland-plants/7842984

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-supran/scientific-organizations_b_11990708.html

http://www.mystatesman.com/news/news/from-science-committee-perch-rep-lamar-smith-attac/nsXm2/

Marohasy talks about Bushfires, this talks about arctic wildfires
http://cosmosmagazine.com/climate/wildfires-to-increase-in-the-subarctic

Malcolm Roberts calls for 'Aus-Exit' from UN IMF
http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/one-nation-senator-malcolm-roberts-calls-for-ausexit-from-monster-united-nations-in-first-speech-20160913-grfojm.html

ExxonMobil AGU
http://commons.commondreams.org/t/to-protect-integrity-of-climate-science-geophysical-society-urged-to-drop-exxon/29248

and Last Week

September 4 – 10, 2016 400.97 ppm
September 4 – 10, 2015 397.91 ppm

3.06 ppm

Ugly number. Nuff said?
http://www.co2.earth/weekly-co2

GISTEMP has posted for August with an anomaly of +0.98ºC, the hottest August on record & the 11th month in a row to be hottest (or equal hottest) for its month.

August was also the warmest month on record in absolute temperature pipping July 2016.

August’s anomaly stands as the 8th warmest month in the full record.
The average anomaly for 2016-to-date is running at +1.05ºC.

This compares with the average for the last 12-months of +1.03ºC and the average for the last calendar year (also presently the record calendar year) of +0.87ºC.

The remainder of 2016 would have to average above +0.50ºC to gain the ‘warmest calendar year’ accolade. (last 4 months’ average of all years since 2000 have been above +0.50ºC.)

Anomalies for 2015/16 and their rankings within the full record:
2015.. 1 … +0.82ºC … = 21th
2015.. 2 … +0.87ºC . = 16th
2015.. 3 … +0.91ºC . = 12th
2015.. 4 … +0.74ºC . = 53rd
2015.. 5 … +0.78ºC . = 30th
2015.. 6 … +0.78ºC . = 30th
2015.. 7 … +0.72ºC . = 60th
2015.. 8 … +0.78ºC . = 30th
2015.. 9 … +0.81ºC . = 23rd
2015. 10 … +1.07ºC … 6th
2015. 11 … +1.01ºC … 7th
2015. 12 … +1.10ºC … 4th
2016.. 1 … +1.15ºC … 3rd
2016.. 2 … +1.32ºC … 1st
2016.. 3 … +1.28ºC … 2nd
2016.. 4 … +1.08ºC … 5th
2016.. 5 … +0.93ºC … 10th
2016.. 6 … +0.80ºC … 25th
2016.. 7 … +0.85ºC … 20th
2016.. 8 … +0.98ºC … 8th
-
Tip: Read the science too!

The distinction between true scepticism and denial?

NASA Worldview “true-color” image of the North Pole on September 8th 2016, derived from the MODIS sensor on the Terra satellite

1000 klm wide view - that's the North Pole where the lines connect.

http://greatwhitecon.info/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/NPole-Terra-20160908.jpg

Refs:
http://greatwhitecon.info/blog/

http://neven1.typepad.com/

http://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews

30K climate scientists?

Well it depends how you define 'climate scientists'. Those that specifically study the climate are climatologists but there are many other branches of science that also involve the study of the climate.

My determination is if they are actually involved in doing climate science as in "working" or "volunteering" in climate science connected research, actively studying climate issues and/or in the field and/or publishing new papers, whatever.

It's said in recent years (2000+) 18,000 people have qualified as climatologists. It would be reasonable to assume that this constitutes no more than half the total number of climatologists, on that basis the number will be upwards of 36,000?

There is no international register of climatologists so it's very hard to provide a specific number.

Some time ago I did read on a skeptics website that the number of climatologists was "only 31,000"

If you widen the definition of 'climate-scientists' to include related disciplines such as meteorologists and paleoclimatologists then the numbers will run into the hundreds of thousands.

Widen the definition further to include astrophysicists, atmospheric chemists, glaciologists and the like and you could probably add another 50,000.

If you were to extend the definition to include all overlapping disciplines such as sedimentologists, hydrologists and dendrochronologists COMPUTER MODELERS NASA BIOLOGISTS LIKE MAROHASY LAWYERS LIKE JOHN ABBOT then it's probable that the number of 'climate scientists' would be in the order of a million.

The key question is, is the science valid and supported by those in the climate field -- yes yes yes yes yes, and yes.

30,000 or 3,000 or 3 million ... does it matter that much?

For perspective there are 26,000 members of The Geological Society of AMERICA (GSA)

So it 'depends'. And doesn't matter, except that when one lines up the denier activist numbers of about 30 globally less than 10 have ever done published work in 'climate science' as we know it today.

And Physics tells us that an empty vessel makes the most noise. :-)