“How can you deny that man made global warming is real when 97 percent of climate scientists agree that it is true?” It’s easy when you understand where the 97% number comes from. For one thing, the survey on which it was based was sent to over 10,000 scientists, but only 3,100 responded. The 97% is addressing the 3,100 who answered, not the other 7,000 who didn’t give a crap. Somehow the AGW cultists didn’t feel the need to mention that.
View Comments (13)
N.B. the exact questions that were asked in the survey (not exact quotes):
Do you think the earth has warmed since before the 1800's?
And what ended in the late 1800's? The "Little Ice Age"!!
Do you think human activity has something to do with that?
These questions are so vague that any statistical meaning derived therefrom is meaningless.
FYI - there really is no debate about the effect of CO2 on the climate (approx 0.7-1 deg C rise as a result of a doubling of CO2), nor is there debate that the earth has warmed since the Little Ice Age.
In a nutshell, the crux of the debate lies in the estimation of how much cumulative effect will be on top of the 0.7-1 deg C rise. E.g., because the icecaps, glaciers, and snow cover decrease, there is less light/heat reflected into the atmosphere, and that has its own effects.
Because the oceans warm up, there is more evaporation, which increases the amount of water vapor in the atmosphere. And water vapor is a REAL greenhouse effect creator, much much more so than CO2.
On the other hand, increased CO2 will cause plants to grow more vigourously, which will then increase consumption of CO2.
There is a whole string of effects, and then effects of effects, and so on. The further you go with if this then that, the less certainty you have of what will happen.
THAT is where sanity diverges from "consensus". The biggest problem there is that the warmists came up with "the most likely scenario". "Most likely", to be science, must necessarily be determined using standard statistical math. Statistics, in order to determine likelihood of anything, must use some sort of sample of data.
And here is where we run into the wicket that is sticky.
THERE IS NO DATA. No sample, no history, no nothin'. So what did the "grounded in science" people do? They just made shit up.
Therefore, we are not denying "science". We are denying the validity of shit.
Fuzzy math from a bunch of PHD's, whoda thunk it?
Argumentum ad populum non credeo
In a twist, about 97% of Americans believe in God and the minority liberals insist there is no God.
Funny how liberals work ain't it
Someone last year posted pictures of most the monitoring stations in this country being either on a hot parking lot or next to an exhaust fan or even both . I'd love to have them repost that article.
You can find a survey of weather stations, including pictures, here.
http://surfacestations.org/
Still another article link from this board today:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/08/glaciers-mountains?intcmp=122
The argument is not just weak, there has been a lot of proof to the otherwise and evidence of coercion to submit falsified reports, false reports and just plain junk science. The solutions to the supposed problem are huge and very damaging to this and many other countries. It also appears to be a real avenue to absolute control over many societies including ours. What I have seen looks to be very damaging to very poor countries around the world where ridiculous policies to cure a problem diagnosed with very junk science are put into place at the peril of entire populations. Environmentalism is just as fanatic a religion as fundamentalist islam is. Very Scarry
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/feb/08/glaciers-mountains?intcmp=122
Theriouthly, are you theriouth? The AlGoreWorship is REAL! Those crazy German scientists don't know anything! Everybody knows that the science is settled, man... The snow is mellllteeeng! The water levels will soon have risen over the windmills! The Europeans will be sweating profusely in February!
More concern should be directed at Weaponized Asteroids.
Most Scientists don't take the time out of their important work to talk to ignoramus'
Global warming is real, proven beyond any doubt. Even the Scientist hired by the right to debunk the data released his findings last month. He found all the data to be "accurate"!
Case Closed, its real! There is no evidence to the Contrary!
Case Closed, its real! There is no evidence to the Contrary!
The world is flat and the moon is made of cheese too!
Mmmm, cheese.......
The ignoramuses you allude to are the creators of the online survey who were attempting to demonstrate the widespread belief of scientists in the "real, proven beyond any doubt" AGW. 70% of them didn't bother to respond. Thanks for stopping by.
I hope I'm not going to be sorry for kicking in my two cents here, Global warming may be real but the argument that it is man made is awfully suspect. It came up again yesterday on this board here, see the link below. That isn't what you are saying is it?
https://www.ihatethemedia.com/germany-awash-in-agw-skepticism-after-release-of-book-coauthored-by-one-of-the-founders-of-the-german-green-movement