Ha. Quite a few people getting upset about my post. <yawn> 'huge stream-of consciousness ascii list', etc. Ha ha ha! Points: * It's TWO lists. Pay attention.

Ha. Quite a few people getting upset about my post. <yawn> 'huge stream-of consciousness ascii list', etc. Ha ha ha! Points: * It's TWO lists. Pay attention. * They're not 'stream of consciousness', they're chronological archives of links to AGW related articles, posts, papers, documentaries, etc. * They're ascii because that works best for maintaining such a record. Deal with it. * They're 'huge' because there's been so much going on in the AGW discussion, especially since the CRU emails story broke. I'm not in any way trying to present a convenient summary, but an archive of events. Deal with that too. Also,can't help laughing at the poor sods who still believe (or pretend) that '95% of climate scientists agree AGW exists and is due to CO2' twaddle. Yeah, if they did I'd have been wasting my time keeping such lists. However,there's no such consensus, only a small number of individuals pretending they represent a near-universal consensus. And being supported in that effort by various media and journals. As becomes clear to anyone who actually looks into the matter. Which could involve reading through a 'huge list of references'- heaven forbid that it might require actual effort. Or that anyone would dare to subvert the 'consensus' by providing a convenient list of dissenting resources.