Real Climate is an excellent climatology blog run by real climate scientists. As far as I can tell, it is by far the best place on the Internet to learn the science behind the AGW case.
The scientists who write for this blog are Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann, Eric Steig, Raymond Bradley, Stefan Rahmstorf, Rasmus Benestad, Caspar Ammann, Thibault de Garidel, David Archer, and Raymond Pierrehumbert.
1. Click here to check out their website.
2. One of their b괥 noires is Richard Lindzen, so they spend a lot of time refuting him. For example,
click here to read Gavin Schmidt on Lindzen (and here and here and here and here and here). Perhaps they should call the site Real Lindzen.
3. Seeing that they spend quite a bit of their time attacking Lindzen, it seems fair to hear what he thinks of them:
“Environmental Media Services (a project of Fenton Communications, a large public relations firm serving left wing and environmental causes; they are responsible for the Alar scare as well as Cindy Sheehan's anti-war campaign.) created a website, realclimate.org, as an ‘authoritative' source for the ‘truth' about climate. This time, real scientists who were also environmental activists, were recruited to organize this web site and ‘discredit' any science or scientist that questioned catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.
The web site serves primarily as a support group for believers in catastrophe, constantly reassuring them that there is no reason to reduce their worrying. Of course, even the above represent potentially unnecessary complexity compared to the long-standing technique of simply publicly claiming that all scientists agree with whatever catastrophe is being promoted. Newsweek already made such a claim in 1988.
Such a claim serves at least two purposes. First, the bulk of the educated public is unable to follow scientific arguments; ‘knowing' that all scientists agree relieves them of any need to do so. Second, such a claim serves as a warning to scientists that the topic at issue is a bit of a minefield that they would do well to avoid.”
Click here to read the rest of Lindzen's essay Climate Science: Is it currently designed to answer questions?