Appealing to the expert is fallacy of logical argument. Discrediting an argument on this basis is similarly invalid.

Do an energy balance. The concern over global warming was not unreasonable during the 1970s and 1980s, as there was valid science to the loss of ozone due to CFC's. The change in CO2 and its effect on global warming is a very minor percentage. You should read Green Engineering by David Allen and David Shonnard. I went to their day-long seminar at a Summer School for Young Chemical Engineering Faculty in 2002, and I've been teaching one lecture every October on the subject ever since. It is so much fun telling the young skulls full of mush the truth.

My credentials do, Maph. Global warming is the biggest hoax since cold fusion, even moreso than the report that a solid material could store 65 wt. % hydrogen in it.

doctorate in Physics, member of American Geophysical Union

Did "Ayn Rand's "credentials" qualify her to form a "reliable opinion" about anything?

Finally someone echoing what I've been saying for years. It's JUNK science. It's ALL hypothetical with no basis in fact People have brains, they should try & use them instead of letting others do the thinking for them.

It sure does...consensus science is profitable

But this kind of social "science" sure creates a lot of (extra) work for a lot of individuals.

Thank you for posting this AJ. All we can do is point out how many people oppose the accepted political view and hope that something changes.