Scientists Revolt Against Global Warming Fearmongering

[Final-Fan]

Sqrl said:

Final-Fan said:
On the other hand, he says that the report of the NIPCC, which I believe Sqrl mentioned, can be summed up as claiming "that global warming probably isn’t happening; if it is happening, it’s not due to human activity; and, besides, a “warmer world will be a safer and healthier world for humans and wildlife alike.”" If true, this appears on the surface to be scattershot FUD. And in particular I would say that the third claim is the one I am most skeptical of. 

FUD is sort of one of those non-specific things though - what specifically do they get wrong? 

This is the issue with the pro-AGW side of the debate recently - they work harder to discredit the source than they do to actually address the points being made.  I mean your own assessment admits that you are going from "appearances" from the "surface".  I mean I appreciate that you might no have the time to read a nearly 900 page document but to just call it FUD and be done is itself just that. FUD.

"It's not happening -- well, even if it is we aren't causing it -- well, even if we are, warming is good!"  You wouldn't be tempted to see that sort of thing as a shotgun attempt to cast as much doubt as possible over as much stuff as possible?  

It sounds like you may be aware of the following and just using my post to point out a fault of others, but just to make sure:  you are bearing in mind that I'm not saying it necessarily is FUD, even if the characterization is fair, which I also do not state as a fact?  (It's not like I'm writing a news piece titled "Do Republicans Eat Babies?" after all.)

Also, does FUD have to be untrue?