Posted on 04/13/2016 10:15:27 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
A research team confirms that 97 percent of climate scientists agree that climate change is caused by humans. The group includes Sarah Green, a chemistry professor at Michigan Technological University.
"What's important is that this is not just one study -- it's the consensus of multiple studies," Green says. This consistency across studies contrasts with the language used by climate change doubters.
"The public has a very skewed view of how much disagreement there is in the scientific community," she says. Only 12 percent of the US public are aware there is such strong scientific agreement in this area, and those who reject mainstream climate science continue to claim that there is a lack of scientific consensus. People who think scientists are still debating climate change do not see the problem as urgent and are unlikely to support solutions.
"By compiling and analyzing all of this research -- essentially a meta-study of meta-studies -- we've established a consistent picture with high levels of scientific agreement among climate experts," she says.
And among climate scientists, there's little doubt. There is consensus on consensus.
(Excerpt) Read more at sciencedaily.com ...
Government funded science also proved the Germans are the superior race.
They get around this by making "assumptions".
If someone were inclined toward fraudulent science, that person could nudge the models in any way desired, just by carefully choosing assumptions.
(The relative effect of water vapor, for instance. How much heat is radiated off into space for another. There are others.)
Then, there is the whole issue of counterfeit data and data manipulation.
Oh, and are scientists who propose alternative, opposing hypotheses given proper forums?
The whole global warming idea (it's actually not qualified to be an hypothesis) completely waterboards the notion of the scientific method into submission.
Monister Goebbels,
How do I reconcile that the 97% of scientist statistic has been debunked and is meaningless?
Regards,
Opie
World biggest money stealing scam!
We are on the mercy of SUN, Sunspot Cycles and wobbly Earth rotation.
99.9% of energy we are getting is from SUNs radiation. Pray and thank God for creating and arranging the Celestial mechanics.
97% Scientwists should be sent to reeducation Gulags in Siberia.
The original 97% figure came from a highly suspect (ok, outright laughably biased and BS) college thesis work. That this “study” just happens to confirm, gosh, that exact same number makes it at least equally suspect.
“What you see here is conflict of interest writ large, These people eat, pay their big mortgages and truck payments and vacations with GOVERNMENT GRANTS!!! They are government controlled puppets. Do you think they get their grant if they tell the truth?”
An absolute truth. A friend told me of his experience teaching a class on report writing to researchers at CDC in Atlanta. All those in the class were doing research on AIDS. The friend asked if AIDS was that big a threat and was told, No, but if we don’t tie our research to AIDS, it won’t get funded. No Grants.
The consensus:
1. All scientists given the same made up numbers.
2. All scientists given the same model (macro) designed to cherry pick and output the desired result.
3. Everyone runs the same false data through the same flawed macro model, all come up with the same false results.
4. It is a consensus since everyone has the same result.
So the liars agree with the liars.
97% of who?!?!?!
Oh yeah, that tiny fraction of a tiny fraction that answered a questionnaire back in 2006 (or some such).
Maybe they should look into ACTUAL Science instead of government “science”.
These Socialist Liars totally ignore the 31,000 Scientists that say man-made global warming is a hoax.
http://www.petitionproject.org/
There are hundreds and hundreds of articles using real Science to debunk the frauds that promote the Socialist notion of man made Climate Change.
Have the liars all forgotten Climategate.
Toto pulled the curtain and revealed the crazy old man posing as the Great and Powerful Climate Scientist.
We the People are not that stupid. Stop trying to sell us otter spraints and telling us it is filet mignon.
“We need Trofim Lysenko here.”
I think the climate change “scientists” have been plagurizing his work for years.
They just use the replace feature on their software a lot.
You wouldn’t lie to me....
wouldja ?
( ; )
Science is not consensus.
Facts are not subject to popular vote.
You will believe or ve vill make you believe. Jaaa!!!
Time travelers.
That’s the identical percentage of votes that Putin got in the last election!
“they say” that if you.....”they” have identified themselves.
I’m one of the 3%, but all that matters is the Occupy Eall Street 99%. That’s why slavery was so right for do long, until it wasn’t.
It was Savage that gave those numbers, I almost hit the floor
You've almost got it right. They sent out around 10,000. 3400 were returned. They didn't like what those said, so they eliminated all but 77. Of those, all but 2 supported what they wanted them to support. 75/77=97%.
I did NOT make this up.
It is worse in the idolatry of Global Warming. When the data collapsed on them( its COOLING) they went to ambiguity — Climate Change. Are we this dumb? What is the measurable criteria of that change? How do we know without criteria. Its just a nebulous nothing supported by nothing the intent of which is to control you life and take your stuff. I have been asking for criteria on this site for 8 months repeatedly. Not one single poster has put forth even the weakest of data or criteria that we can measured. The whole thing is BIG LIE and a fraud!
That’s right, your figures are correct, I was trying to remember the numbers exactly.
They sent out around 10,000. 3400 were returned. They didn’t like what those said, so they eliminated all but 77. Of those, all but 2 supported what they wanted them to support. 75/77=97%.
I don’t recall a step called “consensus” when I learned the Scientific Method. When was it added?
“It is worse in the idolatry of Global Warming. When the data collapsed on them( its COOLING) they went to ambiguity — Climate Change. Are we this dumb? What is the measurable criteria of that change? How do we know without criteria. Its just a nebulous nothing supported by nothing the intent of which is to control you life and take your stuff.”
When I was I college, I participated in several Model UN sessions where we simulated the workings of the UN. The Redistribution of World Wealth was one of the resolutions we had to debate. It was full of social justice crap. How the developed countries became rich by exploiting the third world and how they ‘owed’ the rest of the world. That was in the sixties. Now, global climate change which is nothing more than a more sophisticated justification for redistributing the wealth of the world (with the UN in charge of course.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.