97-98% of Climate Scientists Believe in Climate Change and the Remaining 2-3% Are Not Credible Climate Scientists

[Hersir]

97-98% of climate scientists believe in climate change and the remaining 2-3% are not credible climate scientists

Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

Continues http://www.pnas.org/content/early/20....full.pdf+html

[SwordOfTheVistula]

In other news, 97-98% of African Studies sociologists believe in Institutionalized White Supremacy, and 97-98% of Gender Studies sociologists believe in Oppression by the Patriarchy

[Stormraaf]

The natural sciences are far less vulnerable to abuse by popular opinion or by the dominant ideology than are the social sciences, especially if those supposed social sciences are so far removed from adhering to the scientific method as contemporary African Studies or Gender Studies (which really can't by any measure be said to uphold the standard of scientific inquiry).

[Hersir]

In other news, 97-98% of African Studies sociologists believe in Institutionalized White Supremacy, and 97-98% of Gender Studies sociologists believe in Oppression by the Patriarchy

That is something completly different, and irrellevant to this thread. The only people I've seen to dispute that the climate is changing here has been Americans.

[SaxonPagan]

I think I've written this before but the climate IS changing, as it has always done throughout the history of the planet. The scientists just don't have a clue HOW it's changing, nor what the causes of this are (I suspect they're at least 80% natural ones!)

For those of my age group (52) it doesn't seem long ago that we were heading for a new Ice Age according to certain "experts" of the 1970's, and back then all the talk was about "Global Cooling".

It seems incredible now and I sometimes wonder whether I imagined it, but no ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

... always beware of the "experts" and their "scientific evidence"

In the case of today's (alleged) Global Warming, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with this if it were not being systematically used as a means of obtaining taxes by stealth from the general public

[SwordOfTheVistula]

The natural sciences are far less vulnerable to abuse by popular opinion or by the dominant ideology than are the social sciences, especially if those supposed social sciences are so far removed from adhering to the scientific method as contemporary African Studies or Gender Studies (which really can't by any measure be said to uphold the standard of scientific inquiry).

Not really. They're all from the same source, government/leftist universities, so they put forth the politically correct 'studies' which are needed to push the marxist agenda. Look at all these BS 'genetics' studies claiming 'we are all the same'.

The only people I've seen to dispute that the climate is changing here has been Americans.

The leading critics of the 'man-made global warming' BS are University of Copenhagen Professor Bjarne Andresen and British Lord Christopher Monckton.

At any rate, it is 100% the same as those BS racial/gender studies, you have 'academics' funded by mainly governmental sources, who come up with 'studies' which 'justify' BS policies to establish governmental control over the energy sector, drive up the cost of living, and destroy all the good paying jobs held by the native working class in the energy sector.

[Hersir]

I think I've written this before but the climate IS changing, as it has always done throughout the history of the planet. The scientists just don't have a clue HOW it's changing, nor what the causes of this are (I suspect they're at least 80% natural ones!)

For those of my age group (52) it doesn't seem long ago that we were heading for a new Ice Age according to certain "experts" of the 1970's, and back then all the talk was about "Global Cooling".

It seems incredible now and I sometimes wonder whether I imagined it, but no ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

... always beware of the "experts" and their "scientific evidence"

In the case of today's (alleged) Global Warming, I'd feel a lot more comfortable with this if it were not being systematically used as a means of obtaining taxes by stealth from the general public

Actually, global warming also leads to global cooling.
The largest climate gas is water wapor, when it builds up it BLOCKS OUT THE SUN. This is called global dimming.

Also humans release alot of particles in the air, we call them aerosols. While some contribute to more warming, they all in all add to global cooling. There is mostly a scientific cencus that humans are contributing to global warming, it is hard to deny it. The thing is, the scientists DO have a clue on how and why it is changing.

[Hersir]

Not really. They're all from the same source, government/leftist universities, so they put forth the politically correct 'studies' which are needed to push the marxist agenda. Look at all these BS 'genetics' studies claiming 'we are all the same'.



The leading critics of the 'man-made global warming' BS are University of Copenhagen Professor Bjarne Andresen and British Lord Christopher Monckton.

At any rate, it is 100% the same as those BS racial/gender studies, you have 'academics' funded by mainly governmental sources, who come up with 'studies' which 'justify' BS policies to establish governmental control over the energy sector, drive up the cost of living, and destroy all the good paying jobs held by the native working class in the energy sector.

It is not 100% the same, on what grounds do you base this?
I think the US government fund scientists that say human made global warming ISNT happening, because it would hurt the economy. Ofcourse many people would get rich of further destroying our planet.


I do think we humans use too much of everything, items own us now, not the other way around. Our ancestors relied and took care of nature, they knew they had to do it or they would perish. We have moved too far away from nature, and we need to return to a more natural way of living. This is a germanic preservationist forum and by taking care of nature we are taking care of ourselves.

It is interesting to note that in almost all the treads about global warming, people post that it's just BS without hardly looking at the supporting evidence.

[velvet]

Yeah, right, the polar ice is melting because climate doesnt change. Or the permafrost in Siberia, Greenland, Canada or elsewhere. The ozon hole is panic making too (ask Australians for qualified opinion), storms like Katrina and others that are devastating as never before (and it's just the beginning) with wind reaching 400km/h and all over the coast of America hurricanes with 300km radius. Increased tsunami frequency all over the globe, more devastating due to the higher sea level through the melting ice, the "common" floods around some rivers arent even worth mentioning in the news, because it has become a permanent state meanwhile (south-east Germany, Donau, Main, Rhine, Inn and further down east), storms and even smaller hurricanes throughout middle Europe etc etc. Yeah, all perfectly normal. No it's not people.


The biggest climate problem beside MASSIVE INDUSTRIAL environment pollution is indeed the exploding world population. Not only cows fart, also humans do. 30 years ago only HALF as many as today, apart from the CO2 that is produced while producing their food and future luxury goods - while the doubling of the world population happened basically in Africa and West-Asia (Arabs, Turks etc), WE produce the CO2, pollute OUR environment to feed this scum, that then wants so much to live in Europe - welcome immigrants flood.


And the global dimming could become a literal nuclear winter when (not if) the permafrost in Siberia and Greenland melts. Then it will release the methane, CO2, sulfur and other toxic gasses and particles that it keeps safely locked away in its depths since the meteor impact 65mio years ago.

All climate changes throughout these millions of years have never endangered the permafrost, what we are doing to this planet right now will turn out just as devastating as the impact itself.

And the speed of the process of the ice caps melting and the permafrost increases with every meter lost forever.

The Iceland Volcano might have saved us some years, so let's hope that maybe Mt St Helen, Yellowstone or another big volcano explodes soon and buys us some other years before man-made apocalypse kills us all - for profit's sake

[Hamar Fox]

I dislike both conservatives and liberals, so I have no natural bias. But in the case of the GW controversy, it's obvious to me that it's the conservatives who are full of BS.