It's funny, those that support theories of global warming do so with the caveat of "consensus"; thereby attempting to discount any opposing scientific views from other scientists.

If there is consensus why the opposing views? Simple answer...the only consensus is from that those that want to think there is consensus.

janesvillean,
and i'm certain i could wade through your sources to find one oddball as well.
that you would color my entire argument as foolish or eccentric for one person's so called "questionable" qualifications, is absurd.
there are two sides to this argument - and mounds of opinion, theory and facts to support both.
you obviously feel the sky is falling.
i don't.
i'm not as smart as you, but geez, you're looking at 20 years out of what -- several billion? is that considered a good sample?
oh -- and nbc.cbs.pbs.abc.msnbc -- no propaganda there.
taking the bet?

booch11, I don't assume that -- I know which television network is open propaganda.
.
As to your "sources":
"The Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) describes itself as "a small research institute" that studies "biochemistry, diagnostic medicine, nutrition, preventive medicine and the molecular biology of aging." It is headed by Arthur B. Robinson, an eccentric scientist who has a long history of controversial entanglements with figures on the fringe of accepted research. OISM also markets a home-schooling kit for "parents concerned about socialism in the public schools" and publishes books on how to survive nuclear war."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?tit...
.
Color me unsurprised. It would be funny, if the consequences weren't so dire.

as for your claim of a "worldwide consensus" that global warming is indeed factual, "On May 19th 2008, OISM announced that over 31,000 scientists, including more than 9,000 with Ph.D.s, signed a petition that states, "... There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane or other greenhouse gases is causing, or will cause in the future, catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate..."
http://www.salem-news.com/articles/june0...
*************
WASHINGTON–(BUSINESS WIRE)—The Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI) in Washington reports that a leading expert on climate and former advisor to Margaret Thatcher as UK Prime Minister, has dismissed as false a recent claim by the Washington Post that “most scientists now say there is a consensus about climate change”; that warming is “unequivocal”; and that most of the warming of the past century was manmade.
http://anhonestclimatedebate.wordpress.c...
****************
my point janesvillean, is there is no consensus -- the claim of one is as full of holes as that of those who believe that one day is Wisconsinites will be living in the desert. meanwhile it's estimated by Obama that cap and trade will cost each and every family in the untied states $1,761 annually.
and what will cap and trade accomplish?
my bet stands.

and one more thing, why janesvillean do you and your ilk always assume us sheep only get our news from fox?

the bet is with janesvillean.
an i stand by it.

janesvillean:
as i predicted you trotted out the usual "sky is falling science." there is just as much science that debunks what chicken little said.
my problem is the laws that are being proposed that will fix nothing -- but will cause you, me and everyone else in this country $$$ and jobs.

As a New Yorker article noted a few years ago, in almost every area of science, the public tends to me more alarmed than the scientists about what is happening or might happen (example: Pete's weird worry about the Sun, below, like it's going nova sometime before the next billion years or so). In climate change, however, it's the scientists who are much more alarmed than the public seems to be.
.
I don't suppose actual photography is something you would consider an authoritative source, either. But this is new footage of glacier loss in multiple parts of the world, taken by the Extreme Ice Survey.
http://www.ted.com/talks/james_balog_tim...
http://www.extremeicesurvey.org/
.
Polar ice in particular is considered a "canary in the coal mine" for global warming, and study after study reveals that it is melting at a pace unprecedented even in the history of monitoring.
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news...
.
Arctic temperatures are expected to rise faster than global temperatures overall as part of a complex feedback loop. The Arctic Ocean may be substantially free of ice year-round within our lifetimes, and passable to commercial shipping in just the next few years.
http://blogs.discovery.com/earth/2009/09...
.
But ice is only part of the story. The loss of reflective ice will further warm the seawaters, and globally, as the seawater warms up, it will expand (you did this experiment in high school, I hope). This is expected to lead to a dramatic rise in sea level, swamping coastlines everywhere.
http://www.livescience.com/environment/e...
.
If you're not worried, well, you're just not paying attention.

booch11, I don't know what you consider an authoritative source, but the fact that your counterargument is a children's tale speaks volumes. My sources, are, indeed, scientists.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/arc...
.
Contrary to what you hear on FOX News, there is a worldwide consensus about climate change. There are a few skeptics, some of whom are a respectful part of the debate about individual aspects, but for the most part these are non-experts who are backed by interested parties such as the energy industry or right-wing political parties. It's very unfortunate that a small group of cranks is portrayed as having "debunked" the consensus of thousands of scientists working in dozens of countries for hundreds of respected, independent research institutions.

beeferer, I'm sorry our posts weren't corny enough for your tastes.

...And the winner is- drum roll, please-
onelife2live- the only one with a comment relative to the story! Second place goes to
booch11- for mentioning the word "acorn" because "corn" is a part of the word.

booch11, if someone takes your bet and wins, how do they collect...?

One day Chicken Little was walking in the woods when — KERPLUNK — an acorn fell on her head

"Oh my goodness!" said Chicken Little. "The sky is falling! I must go and tell the king."
*
On her way to the king's palace, Chicken Little met Henny Penny. Henny Penny said that she was going into the woods to hunt for worms.

"Oh no, don't go!" said Chicken Little. "I was there and the sky fell on my head! Come with me to tell the king."

So Henny Penny joined Chicken Little and they went along and went along as fast as they could.

Soon they met Cocky Locky, who said, "I'm going to the woods to hunt for seeds."

"Oh no, don't go!" said Henny Penny. "The sky is falling there! Come with us to tell the king."

So Cocky Locky joined Henny Penny and Chicken Little, and they went along and went along as fast as they could.

Soon they met Goosey Poosey, who was planning to go to the woods to look for berries.

"Oh no, don't go!" said Cocky Locky. "The sky is falling there! Come with us to tell the king." So Goosey Poosey joined Cocky Locky, Henny Penny and Chicken Little, and they went along as fast as they could.

Then who should appear on the path but sly old Foxy Woxy.

"Where are you going, my fine feathered friends?" asked Foxy Woxy. He spoke in a polite manner, so as not to frighten them.

"The sky is falling!" cried Chicken Little. "We must tell the king."

"I know a shortcut to the palace," said Foxy woxy sweetly. "Come and follow me."
******
But wicked Foxy Woxy did not lead the others to the palace. He led them right up to the entrance of his foxhole. Once they were inside, Foxy Woxy was planning to gobble them up!
***********
Just as Chicken Little and the others were about to go into the fox's hole, they heard a strange sound and stopped.
***********
It was the king's hunting dogs, growling and howling.
How Foxy Woxy ran, across the meadows and through the forests, with the hounds close behind. He ran until he was far, far away and never dared to come back again.
***********
After that day, Chicken Little always carried an umbrella with her when she walked in the woods. The umbrella was a present from the king. And if — KERPLUNK — an acorn fell, Chicken Little didn't mind a bit. In fact, she didn't notice it at all.
the end
************
i found this posted by a meteorologist in 1997 with this final note:
(If you're wondering why this page is in CapeCanaveral, just consider it to be a lesson about atmospheric dynamics
and speculative meteorology)

janesvillean,
i realize you put yourself up as the smartest guy in the room.
however, the entire global warming/climate change/whatever you want to call it to counteract trends as of today, are unproven and considered by people smarter than you and I will ever be, as bad science. i fully believe you'll come back with this study or that.
*****
it's unproven. gore's science has been knocked down more times than some punch drunk boxer.
****
and, we want to pass taxes that will kill business and do nothing to change the weather -- or the climate.
*******
the tokyo representative at the olympic committee selection meeting in copenhagen (who flew in -- round trip 11,000 miles) said, this is likely the last olympics we will ever see (2016) as the world does not have long to live.
******
God willing, and I live to the year 2016, I'll bet you $1,000 the world will exist and the temps will have changed very little -- up or down. wanna take the bet?

cooler weather may have hurt? It hurt the crop, no doubt about it. Newsworthy? Or common sense?

Climate change is not the same as weather. Climate change does not mean that cooling and warming cycles go away. In particular we are likely to see increased extremes of the El Nino/La Nina cool-warm wet-dry cycle.

pete:
makes you think anyone who decides a few years of minute cooling or a few years of minute warming means anything other than the freakin weather changes!