Dear Dr Emeritus Professor Austin Powerless esq. sir,

My stupid point is, there is NO VETTING procedure! You send in your form with one of the qualifications boxes ticked and your name goes on the petition. Roughly a third of the list claim PhD. status.

Yours in scholarly brotherhood, Sir Dr. Luciferase PhD. OBE OA esq

Hey Individual,

<<SPQR,
That comparison is purely idiotic. The drones were designed to fight the insidiousness of the wrong. No moron bombers, no drones. Quite simple.
You lot never see the picture...>>

You do realize that I was quoting/linking to one of CSTEELE'S EARLIER POSTS-- don't you?

When she is not crusading against "Big Oil", and saving the planet. She's on her other hobby horse defending the Taliban (and their allies) and ridiculing the West.

To add, Dr. Austin P., you'll find this is the supposed vetting procedure to weed out people like me. You can drive an ore truck through it:

"Opponents of the petition project sometimes submit forged signatures in efforts to discredit the project. Usually, these efforts are eliminated by our verification procedures. On one occasion, a forged signature appeared briefly on the signatory list. It was removed as soon as discovered."

Wow! How was it discovered?! It's BS

I define this as NO VETTING PROCEDURE! There is no requirement indicated to provide any evidence, whatsoever, that you hold the qualification claimed before your name is added to the petition.

I'm not alone, for example:
http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-11-12/
http://www.skepticalscience.com/news.php?n=158

Hi Austin

You said..."I think we should ignore what is not obvious and carry on into the future".....well you have it haft right.

Yes by all means carry on into the future, but cant we clean up after ourselves as the time limits are obviously in place and on the humans side. I believe this is totally do-able, hence our side of things.

It can be done.

cc

Steely, now your turn. Did you see the facts that CO2 can give less than 1 C warming. That's from your con men too.

How much of that published literature demonstrating the lying cheating, & fraudulent practices of the IPCC, & the CRU have you read?

It is known as Climategate 1 & Climategate 2, & is testimony given by the major warmest players, showing what a bunch of misguided, or criminal people they are.

Oh, back to you.

Dear Hasbeen,

You’ve got a bloody hide mate.

You and your lot have come on here and among other things quoted a newspaper from 1922 that had been doctored to suit the deniers case, linked to a site which is found to be little more than a mouth piece for the mining industry hell bent on twisting facts to suit themselves, and raised something as having been published by NASA when it most definitely had not been. I'm not going to dignify these as being just sloppy because that would be too kind.

Then you have the cheek to condemn those who have raised concerns about the risks of doubling CO2 concentrations as conmen and possibly criminals?

Yup, I think I might almost be speechless.

So what evidence have you for a negative forcing of CO2?