re: #446 Ian MacGregor
The great majority of scientists who are studying the problem favor AGE as real, significant, and in dire need of addressing. Mr. Watts and Dr Dyson hold a minority view. The scientific consensus in support of AGE cannot be denied and is a call for action.

All of which, of course, is absurd. There’s a strong consensus among those funded to perform global-warming research that they want to keep their funding.

There’s the James Hansens, like Major Nicholson from Bridge on the River Kwai, who’ve bet their careers on something that’s increasingly looking like a house of cards and have ratcheted the shrill-meter up to 11.

There’s the head of the IPCC whose qualifications for the position he holds are highly dubious, to say the least.

Consensus is not science. And, noting (for instance) another post on Mr Watts’ site where the members of the American Chemical Society are now in revolt against the editor of their house magazine over his strident warmism, the consensus is starting to look a bit shaky, isn’t it?

A lot of folks have been keeping their head down, afraid the political hammer might whack it if they spoke up. As the “consensus” develops cracks, more and more are starting to speak up.