Richard Lindzen is one scientist who is regularly criticized by his peers. Calling him a learned scientist is disputed by better men than me. I am comfortable with my statements and see no fallacy, as any credible research into Richard Lindzin's character would reveal the same facts that I have acquired. YouTube videos are also not a credible source of information, and must be dismissed in favor of more appropriate data, which I presented. Also, you're hardly one to talk about logical fallacies when you listed man-made climate change debate as an 'proven example' of a failure of consensus when in fact it is far from unproven. That combination of recursion and premature declaration of victory was simply unacceptable.+Scott Munro
It is said that any fool in error can find a quote in the bible, and you are doing your best to prove that statement right. Your links refers to the post-Climategate era, where there was a record level of climate change politicization that affected even learned scientists. It is sad but true: scientists are human, and they make errors. Even so, since then the scientists involved in the so-called 'scandal' were exonerated, and life in the scientific community returned to normal. http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/conspiracy-theories-finally-laid-to-rest-by-report-on-leaked-climate-change-emails-2021222.html
has some of the details. You are taking incomplete snapshots of this debate and presenting them as a consistent trend. This is unacceptable.
But I am sick of repeating myself, and am growing tired of this. I'm muting this post, much to Armando Lioss's relief I imagine.