Not 97% but .3% of Climatologists agree.

[futurecurrents]

the only science behind man made co2 causing warming were computer models.
the models failed so now there is no science.

 

[jem]

hey fraudcurrents... only 41 papers out of 11000 support your agw nutter position.

its not 97% its less than one percent.

see the first page of this thread.

Hey jem!

Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.


AMERICAN SCIENTIFIC SOCIETIES
Statement on climate change from 18 scientific associations
"Observations throughout the world make it clear that climate change is occurring, and rigorous scientific research demonstrates that the greenhouse gases emitted by human activities are the primary driver." (2009)2
AAAS emblem
American Association for the Advancement of Science
"The scientific evidence is clear: global climate change caused by human activities is occurring now, and it is a growing threat to society." (2006)3
ACS emblem
American Chemical Society
"Comprehensive scientific assessments of our current and potential future climates clearly indicate that climate change is real, largely attributable to emissions from human activities, and potentially a very serious problem." (2004)4
AGU emblem
American Geophysical Union
"Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes." (Adopted 2003, revised and reaffirmed 2007, 2012, 2013)5
AMA emblem
American Medical Association
"Our AMA ... supports the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s fourth assessment report and concurs with the scientific consensus that the Earth is undergoing adverse global climate change and that anthropogenic contributions are significant." (2013)6
AMS emblem
American Meteorological Society
"It is clear from extensive scientific evidence that the dominant cause of the rapid change in climate of the past half century is human-induced increases in the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, and nitrous oxide." (2012)7
APS emblem
American Physical Society
"The evidence is incontrovertible: Global warming is occurring. If no mitigating actions are taken, significant disruptions in the Earth’s physical and ecological systems, social systems, security and human health are likely to occur. We must reduce emissions of greenhouse gases beginning now." (2007)8
GSA emblem
The Geological Society of America
"The Geological Society of America (GSA) concurs with assessments by the National Academies of Science (2005), the National Research Council (2006), and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2007) that global climate has warmed and that human activities (mainly greenhouse‐gas emissions) account for most of the warming since the middle 1900s." (2006; revised 2010)9


SCIENCE ACADEMIES
International academies: Joint statement
"Climate change is real. There will always be uncertainty in understanding a system as complex as the world’s climate. However there is now strong evidence that significant global warming is occurring. The evidence comes from direct measurements of rising surface air temperatures and subsurface ocean temperatures and from phenomena such as increases in average global sea levels, retreating glaciers, and changes to many physical and biological systems. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001)." (2005, 11 international science academies)10
USNAS emblem
U.S. National Academy of Sciences
"The scientific understanding of climate change is now sufficiently clear to justify taking steps to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere." (2005)11


U.S. GOVERNMENT AGENCIES
USGCRP emblem
U.S. Global Change Research Program
"The global warming of the past 50 years is due primarily to human-induced increases in heat-trapping gases. Human 'fingerprints' also have been identified in many other aspects of the climate system, including changes in ocean heat content, precipitation, atmospheric moisture, and Arctic sea ice." (2009, 13 U.S. government departments and agencies)12


INTERGOVERNMENTAL BODIES
IPCC emblem
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
“Warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level.”13

“Most of the observed increase in global average temperatures since the mid-20th century is very likely* due to the observed increase in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations.”14

*IPCC defines ‘very likely’ as greater than 90 percent probability of occurrence.


OTHER RESOURCES
List of worldwide scientific organizations
The following page lists the nearly 200 worldwide scientific organizations that hold the position that climate change has been caused by human action.
http://opr.ca.gov/s_listoforganizations.php
U.S. agencies
The following page contains information on what federal agencies are doing to adapt to climate change.
http://www.c2es.org/docUploads/federal-agencies-adaptation.pdf



Not one science org denies it. Essentially no climate papers deny it.

 

[jem]

here is the first post of this thread

97% claim exposed / debunked.


http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/...ven-by-a-new-paper-showing-major-math-errors/


“0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

PRESS RELEASE – September 3rd, 2013

A major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1% scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950.

A tweet in President Obama’s name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97% endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous:

“Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” [Emphasis added]

The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”.

The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%.

Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.

 

[futurecurrents]

yes jerm, sure. All the science orgs agree but only 0.03% of the climatologists. You crack me up.

Are you off your meds again? LOL

 

[futurecurrents]

Oh yeah, and they surveyed the scientists and they concurred with the assumption of AGW agreement by the researchers. 97% said they believed. 97.


Because you see. You don't understand this but....CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

 

[gwb-trading]

Oh yeah, and they surveyed the scientists and they concurred with the assumption of AGW agreement by the researchers. 97% said they believed. 97.


Because you see. You don't understand this but....CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

The only real 97% in this discussion.

 

[jem]

hey fraudcurrents until you post some real science... I will repeat...



http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/0...r-math-errors/


“0.3% climate consensus, not 97.1%”

PRESS RELEASE – September 3rd, 2013

A major peer-reviewed paper by four senior researchers has exposed grave errors in an earlier paper in a new and unknown journal that had claimed a 97.1% scientific consensus that Man had caused at least half the 0.7 Cº global warming since 1950.

A tweet in President Obama’s name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97% endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous:

“Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” [Emphasis added]

The new paper by the leading climatologist Dr David Legates and his colleagues, published in the respected Science and Education journal, now in its 21st year of publication, reveals that Cook had not considered whether scientists and their published papers had said climate change was “dangerous”.

The consensus Cook considered was the standard definition: that Man had caused most post-1950 warming. Even on this weaker definition the true consensus among published scientific papers is now demonstrated to be not 97.1%, as Cook had claimed, but only 0.3%.

Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it.

Oh yeah, and they surveyed the scientists and they concurred with the assumption of AGW agreement by the researchers. 97% said they believed. 97.


Because you see. You don't understand this but....CO2 is a greenhouse gas.

 

[jem]

On the other thread I wrote this in response to the fraudcurrents ignorant statement about greenhouse gases.

1. You are so ignorant and such a liar I have shown you this quote from the recent nasa experiment a dozen times... where recently NASA has stated that CO2 is a coolant and that it repels the suns energy... (which is a cooling effect on the planet) And don't give that crap about you don't care about what happens in the upper atmosphere because the scientist making the climate budgets certainly do... and blocking the suns energy is a cooling effect.

http://science.nasa.gov/science-news...2/22mar_saber/

“Carbon dioxide and nitric oxide are natural thermostats,” explains James Russell of Hampton University, SABER’s principal investigator. “When the upper atmosphere (or ‘thermosphere’) heats up, these molecules try as hard as they can to shed that heat back into space.”
That’s what happened on March 8th when a coronal mass ejection (CME) propelled in our direction by an X5-class solar flare hit Earth’s magnetic field. (On the “Richter Scale of Solar Flares,” X-class flares are the most powerful kind.) Energetic particles rained down on the upper atmosphere, depositing their energy where they hit. The action produced spectacular auroras around the poles and significant1 upper atmospheric heating all around the globe.
“The thermosphere lit up like a Christmas tree,” says Russell. “It began to glow intensely at infrared wavelengths as the thermostat effect kicked in.”
For the three day period, March 8th through 10th, the thermosphere absorbed 26 billion kWh of energy. Infrared radiation from CO2 and NO, the two most efficient coolants in the thermosphere, re-radiated 95% of that total back into space.

2. Clouds closely related to water vapor... both reflect some heat down and reflect sun light back out. NASA is studying their overall net effect in our current environment. Recent studies have shown they have big cooling effect in the tropics. Which makes sense to anyone ever under clouds in the tropics. here is more info...
http://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/cloudiness.htm

J.R. Houghton expressed the situation as follows:

Clouds are, in fact, probably the dominant influence in the radiative budget of the lower atmosphere but adequately taking them into account raises many problems […]
The Physics of Atmospheres, p. 41.

Note that recent studies claim that CO2 increases its impact by increasing clouds.
So right their you agw nutter bozos should understand... CO2 can also cool by making more clouds.



3. Water Vapor can have a significant cooling effect through evaporation. Some studies show the effect is larger than its warming effect.

summary...
Scientist are working on improving their radiative budgets right now. Its all guess work... because clouds and other effects have so far proven impossible to model.

So... agw drone trolls ... let me know when you have a radiation budget that can account for all these variables and more... maybe then you will develop a working climate model.

Til then you can't tell me whether adding a greenhouse gas warms or cools.

 

[futurecurrents]

Yes, that's right. 97% of climate scientists agree on the basics of man made global warming, essentially all the world's science organizations, and CO2 warms the atmosphere because it is a greenhouse gas. It does not cool. And only one paper out of thousands rejected AGW. When directly surveyed the scientists agreed. 97% agreed.


Now jerm, go take your meds and find a murderer to defend.

 

[jem]

another fraudulent debunked claim... made by fraudcurrents.

Yes, that's right. 97% of climate scientists agree on the basics of man made global warming, essentially all the world's science organizations, and CO2 warms the atmosphere because it is a greenhouse gas. It does not cool. And only one paper out of thousands rejected AGW. When directly surveyed the scientists agreed. 97% agreed.


Now jerm, go take your meds and find a murderer to defend.