Clean coal anyone?
Regardless of what Rick Perry is saying, Brad Plumer notes in this article on the Washington Post, that the ranks of dissenters don't appear to be swelling. If anything, more scientists are warning that humans are responsible for climate change and that its effects are going to be worse than expected.

It's not just that Perry's wrong. In many ways, the field of climate science is moving in precisely the opposite direction that he's suggesting. Recall that back in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel of Climate Change put out a report synthesizing the scientific work on global warming. While the report sounded quite certain on a number of topics -- noting, for one, that it was "very likely" that most of the observed temperature increases since mid-century were due to man-made greenhouse gases -- there were still plenty of vague spots in the report, especially with regards to sea-level rise.

Yet rather than poke further holes, much of the climate science that's been published since 2007 appears to have strengthened the consensus, not weakened it. Another synthesis report published last May by Britain's Met Office, looking at more than 100 peer-reviewed post-IPCC studies, found that the case for human influence has been bolstered: "We can say with a very high significance level that the effects we see in the climate cannot be attributed to any other forcings."

By the way, the image you see above is a screenshot of the paper this entry links to. Note the advertising on using clean coal for cheap electricity. Did anyone catch the irony of that?