12,000 peer-reviewed abstracts on the subjects of 'global warming' and 'global climate change' published between 1991 and 2011 found that of the papers taking a position on the cause of global warming, over 97% agreed that humans are causing it (Cook 2013). The scientific authors of the papers were also contacted and asked to rate their own papers, and again over 97% whose papers took a position on the cause said humans are causing global warming.
A statistically representative climate change debate
- Thread starter Pekelo
- Start date
totally debunked.
only 41 out of those papers supported the idea that man made co2 was causing global warming and having read a few of those papers I can say they were old and they relied on failed models.
Your numbers are so insane that essentially you pretend to have 10,000 peer reviewed papers saying man made co2 produces global warming.
So why don't you produce some links to 10 of them showing us the science... troll.
10 out of 10,000 would be very instructive.
Prediction... you will not because there is no science.
only 41 out of those papers supported the idea that man made co2 was causing global warming and having read a few of those papers I can say they were old and they relied on failed models.
Your numbers are so insane that essentially you pretend to have 10,000 peer reviewed papers saying man made co2 produces global warming.
So why don't you produce some links to 10 of them showing us the science... troll.
10 out of 10,000 would be very instructive.
Prediction... you will not because there is no science.
Yes debunked in your delusional world. But in the real world it really is 97%. Multiple studies and authors have shown the same thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surveys_of_scientists'_views_on_climate_change
show us the studies - you know you don't have them. As far as I know there are only 1 or 2 even halfway good ones... and they speculate it is man made co2. The rest are failed models and there are very few of them.
that is why you won't produce them.
that is why you won't produce them.
http://lubbockonline.com/interact/b...umans-are-causing-global-warming#.U3Zh4fldVcQ
Dr. Moore continued to put the present climate of Earth into a perspective for the Senators,
Today we remain locked in what is essentially still the Pleistocene Ice Age, with an average global temperature of 14.5oC. This compares with a low of about 12oC during the periods of maximum glaciation in this Ice Age to an average of 22oC during the Greenhouse Ages, which occurred over longer time periods prior to the most recent Ice Age. During the Greenhouse Ages, there was no ice on either pole and all the land was tropical and sub-tropical, from pole to pole. As recently as 5 million years ago the Canadian Arctic islands were completely forested. Today, we live in an unusually cold period in the history of life on earth and there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species. There is ample reason to believe that a sharp cooling of the climate would bring disastrous results for human civilization.
Moving closer to the present day, it is instructive to study the record of average global temperature during the past 130 years. The IPCC states that humans are the dominant cause of warming âsince the mid-20th centuryâ, which is 1950. From 1910 to 1940 there was an increase in global average temperature of 0.5oC over that 30-year period. Then there was a 30-year âpauseâ until 1970. This was followed by an increase of 0.57oC during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Since then there has been no increase, perhaps a slight decrease, in average global temperature. This in itself tends to negate the validity of the computer models, as CO2 emissions have continued to accelerate during this time.
The increase in temperature between 1910-1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970-2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910- 1940 to âhuman influence.â They are clear in their belief that human emissions impact only the increase âsince the mid-20th centuryâ. Why does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by âhuman influenceâ, when it has no explanation for the nearly identical increase from 1910- 1940?
It is important to recognize, in the face of dire predictions about a 2oC rise in global average temperature, that humans are a tropical species. We evolved at the equator in a climate where freezing weather did not exist. The only reasons we can survive these cold climates are fire, clothing, and housing. It could be said that frost and ice are the enemies of life, except for those relatively few species that have evolved to adapt to freezing temperatures during this Pleistocene Ice Age. It is âextremely likelyâ that a warmer temperature than todayâs would be far better than a cooler one.
I realize that my comments are contrary to much of the speculation about our climate that is bandied about today. However, I am confident that history will bear me out, both in terms of the futility of relying on computer models to predict the future, and the fact that warmer temperatures are better than colder temperatures for most species.
It is time to move beyond the hoax of pretending that human economic activity can have a major influence on our climate. Al Gore and Barack Obama are hypocrites who use massive amounts of energy to support their lavish lifestyles. Gore and Obama have been misleading us for their own personal gain of massive amounts of money and power.
China, Russia, India, and other competitive nations have long since rejected the hoax of Global Warming and Climate Change. They will eventually overtake the economy of the United States if our leaders foolishly continue to use Climate Change as a smokescreen for their massive new energy taxes.
The future is indeed bright if we do not listen to the Dim Bulbs who are misleading u
Dr. Moore continued to put the present climate of Earth into a perspective for the Senators,
Today we remain locked in what is essentially still the Pleistocene Ice Age, with an average global temperature of 14.5oC. This compares with a low of about 12oC during the periods of maximum glaciation in this Ice Age to an average of 22oC during the Greenhouse Ages, which occurred over longer time periods prior to the most recent Ice Age. During the Greenhouse Ages, there was no ice on either pole and all the land was tropical and sub-tropical, from pole to pole. As recently as 5 million years ago the Canadian Arctic islands were completely forested. Today, we live in an unusually cold period in the history of life on earth and there is no reason to believe that a warmer climate would be anything but beneficial for humans and the majority of other species. There is ample reason to believe that a sharp cooling of the climate would bring disastrous results for human civilization.
Moving closer to the present day, it is instructive to study the record of average global temperature during the past 130 years. The IPCC states that humans are the dominant cause of warming âsince the mid-20th centuryâ, which is 1950. From 1910 to 1940 there was an increase in global average temperature of 0.5oC over that 30-year period. Then there was a 30-year âpauseâ until 1970. This was followed by an increase of 0.57oC during the 30-year period from 1970 to 2000. Since then there has been no increase, perhaps a slight decrease, in average global temperature. This in itself tends to negate the validity of the computer models, as CO2 emissions have continued to accelerate during this time.
The increase in temperature between 1910-1940 was virtually identical to the increase between 1970-2000. Yet the IPCC does not attribute the increase from 1910- 1940 to âhuman influence.â They are clear in their belief that human emissions impact only the increase âsince the mid-20th centuryâ. Why does the IPCC believe that a virtually identical increase in temperature after 1950 is caused mainly by âhuman influenceâ, when it has no explanation for the nearly identical increase from 1910- 1940?
It is important to recognize, in the face of dire predictions about a 2oC rise in global average temperature, that humans are a tropical species. We evolved at the equator in a climate where freezing weather did not exist. The only reasons we can survive these cold climates are fire, clothing, and housing. It could be said that frost and ice are the enemies of life, except for those relatively few species that have evolved to adapt to freezing temperatures during this Pleistocene Ice Age. It is âextremely likelyâ that a warmer temperature than todayâs would be far better than a cooler one.
I realize that my comments are contrary to much of the speculation about our climate that is bandied about today. However, I am confident that history will bear me out, both in terms of the futility of relying on computer models to predict the future, and the fact that warmer temperatures are better than colder temperatures for most species.
It is time to move beyond the hoax of pretending that human economic activity can have a major influence on our climate. Al Gore and Barack Obama are hypocrites who use massive amounts of energy to support their lavish lifestyles. Gore and Obama have been misleading us for their own personal gain of massive amounts of money and power.
China, Russia, India, and other competitive nations have long since rejected the hoax of Global Warming and Climate Change. They will eventually overtake the economy of the United States if our leaders foolishly continue to use Climate Change as a smokescreen for their massive new energy taxes.
The future is indeed bright if we do not listen to the Dim Bulbs who are misleading u
Written by the "climate scientists" at the American Medical Association no doubt
As an illustrative example of just how isolated Prof Bengtsson and his ilk are, consider the fact reported earlier this year by Scientific American that out of more than 2,000 peer-reviewed climate science publications put out over the last year from November 2012 to December 2013, the number of scientists who denied the role of human-caused CO2 emissions in current climate change "is exactly one."
That's right. One.
Compare that to the number of scientific authors of those 2,000 plus papers - 9,136. So over nine thousand scientists over the last year agree that our fossil fuel emissions are principally responsible for contemporary climate change, and just one disagrees. The poor sod must be feeling pretty damn lonely, I imagine. Perhaps almost as lonely as Prof Bengtsson.
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...denial-big-oil
That's right. One.
Compare that to the number of scientific authors of those 2,000 plus papers - 9,136. So over nine thousand scientists over the last year agree that our fossil fuel emissions are principally responsible for contemporary climate change, and just one disagrees. The poor sod must be feeling pretty damn lonely, I imagine. Perhaps almost as lonely as Prof Bengtsson.
http://www.theguardian.com/environme...denial-big-oil
Total and unadulterated horseshit. Virtually ALL of them do.
And you keep repeating the lie that the models failed. They haven't.
Less than 0.03% of all the world's climatologists reject the overwhelming consensus and common sense science of AGW.
Jem, what the hell is wrong with you? Seriously. Argue what we should do about it if you want. But arguing that the science is wrong is akin to saying 15 is more than 30. That argument is over. Give it up. You sound like an idiot.