How to Become a Conservative in Four Embarrassing Steps

Here it is. I searched and turned up this excerpt taken from a prior post of mine and found rather easily. This is mainly for futurecurrents benefit. I apologize for boring the rest of you by repeating this: [underlining is mine]

Last year, a survey published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (Neil Stenhouse, Edward Maibach, Sara Cobb, Ray Ban, Andrea Bleistein, Paul Croft, Eugene Bierly, Keith Seitter, Gary Rasmussen, and Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014: Meteorologists' Views About Global Warming: A Survey of American Meteorological Society Professional Members. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.roil, 1029–1040.) began by reviewing some earlier and similar surveys published five years ago. Here is Stenhouse, et al.'s summary of the 2009 reviews:

"Research conducted to date with meteorologists and other atmospheric scientists has shown that they are not unanimous in their views of climate change. In a survey of Earth scientists, Doran and Zimmerman (2009) found that, while a majority of meteorologists surveyed are convinced humans have contributed to global warming (GW; 64%), this was a substantially smaller majority than that found among all Earth scientists (82%). Another survey, by Farnsworth and Lichter (2009), found that 83% of meteorologists surveyed were convinced human-induced climate change is occurring, again a smaller majority than among experts in related areas, such as ocean sciences (91%) and geophysics (88%).

Below I have appended Table 1 from the Stenhouse paper which summarizes the responses to questions in the 2014 survey. I personally don't see anything in the Stenhouse survey that would justify a remark such as 100%, or nearly 100%, of scientists, or climate scientists, agree that AGW is real.

I recommend consulting the original manuscript, available free, for more information.
i1520-0477-95-7-1029-t01.jpeg

While not 97%, those percentages are more than sufficient to prompt government and business to begin taking steps to gain control over our CO2 emissions.
 
While not 97%, those percentages are more than sufficient to prompt government and business to begin taking steps to gain control over our CO2 emissions.

Actually businesses are merely looking to make money off of it. Most of the money is handed-out via crony-capitalism from the government using your tax dollars. Al Gore is an excellent example of this nonsense.
 
Would that include energy sector businesses?

Yes... energy sector businesses will actually be some of the biggest beneficiaries. It is an odd twist to the whole "global warming" thing. The biggest loser however is coal, and utilities with coal fired power plants.
 
Here it is. I searched and turned up this excerpt taken from a prior post of mine and found rather easily. This is mainly for futurecurrents benefit. I apologize for boring the rest of you by repeating this: [underlining is mine]

Last year, a survey published in the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society (Neil Stenhouse, Edward Maibach, Sara Cobb, Ray Ban, Andrea Bleistein, Paul Croft, Eugene Bierly, Keith Seitter, Gary Rasmussen, and Anthony Leiserowitz, 2014: Meteorologists' Views About Global Warming: A Survey of American Meteorological Society Professional Members. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc.roil, 1029–1040.) began by reviewing some earlier and similar surveys published five years ago. Here is Stenhouse, et al.'s summary of the 2009 reviews:

"Research conducted to date with meteorologists and other atmospheric scientists has shown that they are not unanimous in their views of climate change. In a survey of Earth scientists, Doran and Zimmerman (2009) found that, while a majority of meteorologists surveyed are convinced humans have contributed to global warming (GW; 64%), this was a substantially smaller majority than that found among all Earth scientists (82%). Another survey, by Farnsworth and Lichter (2009), found that 83% of meteorologists surveyed were convinced human-induced climate change is occurring, again a smaller majority than among experts in related areas, such as ocean sciences (91%) and geophysics (88%).

Below I have appended Table 1 from the Stenhouse paper which summarizes the responses to questions in the 2014 survey. I personally don't see anything in the Stenhouse survey that would justify a remark such as 100%, or nearly 100%, of scientists, or climate scientists, agree that AGW is real.

I recommend consulting the original manuscript, available free, for more information.
i1520-0477-95-7-1029-t01.jpeg


One survey among many........ only the US........weathermen are not climatologists.

Among the world's most published climatologists the consensus is closer to 100%.

A good way to see that is by looking authors that deny AGW.

Denier_Scientists.png


Only one — ONE — of the 9,137 authors of peer-reviewed climate change articles rejected anthropogenic global warming. Geochemist James Powell did the research on publications from November 2012 and December 2013. (But if a year-long sample isn’t good enough for you, Powell previously examined 21 years of peer-reviewed literature and found that only 24 out of 13,950 articles — or two-tenths of a percent — came out and rejected human-caused climate change.)
The lone dissident, S. V. Avakyan, wrote in Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, “The contribution of the greenhouse effect of carbon-containing gases to global warming turns out to be insignificant.” But Coby Beck smacks this idea down in his “How to talk to a climate skeptic” series.
 
Yes... energy sector businesses will actually be some of the biggest beneficiaries. It is an odd twist to the whole "global warming" thing. The biggest loser however is coal, and utilities with coal fired power plants.
Sure is an odd twist. As odd as unicorns.
 
Back
Top