Pontiuth Pilate
Republican Jesus!
A "scientist" who does not "believe" in global warming has published the following essay which states that TEMPERATURE DOES NOT EXIST 
I'll leave the debunking as an exercise.
You may want to reference the Laws of Thermodynamics.
Storm Front
By Paul Georgia Published 03/28/2003
Does the greenhouse effect really work like a greenhouse? Does the average global temperature provide any meaningful climatic information? Is there even a theory of climate? These are some of the questions asked and answered in a new book, Taken by Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy and Politics of Global Warming, written by Christopher Essex, a professor in the Department of Applied Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario, and Ross McKitrick, an associate professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Guelph.
As the title notes, the book addresses both science and politics. As we shall see, the science underlying global warming alarmism is flimsier than most people, even many scientists, suspect. How we have reached a point where the world is on the verge of putting into force a treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, that would stifle economic growth in the developed countries and preclude it in the third world, in the absence of scientific evidence, demands an answer. The answer lies in the perverse incentives that arise from the subjugation of science to politics.
No Physical Meaning
Essex, who studies the underlying mathematics, physics and computation of complex dynamic processes, raises some very fundamental scientific issues with regard to global warming. Take, for instance, the "average global temperature," which is the primary statistic offered as evidence of global warming. The problem with this statistic is that it has no physical meaning. Temperature is not a thermodynamic variable that lends itself to statistical analysis, nor does it measure a physical quantity.
Thermodynamic variables are of two types, says Essex, extensive and intensive. Extensive variables, like energy or mass, occur in amounts. Intensive variables, such as temperature, refer to conditions of a system. A cup of hot coffee, for example, contains an amount of energy and has a temperature. If you add an equal amount of coffee with the same amount of energy and the same temperature to the cup, the amount of energy doubles, but not the temperature. The temperature remains the same. Thus, while you can add up the energy from two separate systems and get total energy, it is physically meaningless to add up the two systems' temperatures. And dividing that number by two doesn't give you the average temperature either. Such an exercise results in a statistic that has no physical meaning. Yet that is exactly what occurs when the average global temperature is computed.
Moreover, temperature and energy aren't the same thing. The internal energy of a system can change without changing the temperature and the temperature can change while the internal energy of the system remains the same. In fact, this occurs all the time in the climate because the two variables are fundamentally different classes of thermodynamic variables and there is no physical law that requires that they move together. The next time somebody informs you that the planet's "average temperature" has increased, you can rest assured that they have told you exactly nothing.
I'll leave the debunking as an exercise.
You may want to reference the Laws of Thermodynamics.Storm Front
By Paul Georgia Published 03/28/2003
Does the greenhouse effect really work like a greenhouse? Does the average global temperature provide any meaningful climatic information? Is there even a theory of climate? These are some of the questions asked and answered in a new book, Taken by Storm: The Troubled Science, Policy and Politics of Global Warming, written by Christopher Essex, a professor in the Department of Applied Mathematics at the University of Western Ontario, and Ross McKitrick, an associate professor in the Department of Economics at the University of Guelph.
As the title notes, the book addresses both science and politics. As we shall see, the science underlying global warming alarmism is flimsier than most people, even many scientists, suspect. How we have reached a point where the world is on the verge of putting into force a treaty, the Kyoto Protocol, that would stifle economic growth in the developed countries and preclude it in the third world, in the absence of scientific evidence, demands an answer. The answer lies in the perverse incentives that arise from the subjugation of science to politics.
No Physical Meaning
Essex, who studies the underlying mathematics, physics and computation of complex dynamic processes, raises some very fundamental scientific issues with regard to global warming. Take, for instance, the "average global temperature," which is the primary statistic offered as evidence of global warming. The problem with this statistic is that it has no physical meaning. Temperature is not a thermodynamic variable that lends itself to statistical analysis, nor does it measure a physical quantity.
Thermodynamic variables are of two types, says Essex, extensive and intensive. Extensive variables, like energy or mass, occur in amounts. Intensive variables, such as temperature, refer to conditions of a system. A cup of hot coffee, for example, contains an amount of energy and has a temperature. If you add an equal amount of coffee with the same amount of energy and the same temperature to the cup, the amount of energy doubles, but not the temperature. The temperature remains the same. Thus, while you can add up the energy from two separate systems and get total energy, it is physically meaningless to add up the two systems' temperatures. And dividing that number by two doesn't give you the average temperature either. Such an exercise results in a statistic that has no physical meaning. Yet that is exactly what occurs when the average global temperature is computed.
Moreover, temperature and energy aren't the same thing. The internal energy of a system can change without changing the temperature and the temperature can change while the internal energy of the system remains the same. In fact, this occurs all the time in the climate because the two variables are fundamentally different classes of thermodynamic variables and there is no physical law that requires that they move together. The next time somebody informs you that the planet's "average temperature" has increased, you can rest assured that they have told you exactly nothing.
You cant be serious.
Temperature doesn't exist? What's next, are they gonna say there is no Santa? 
