Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming

[catatomic]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

 

[Montrovant]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

One guy says he guesses that 40% of scientists doubt manmade global warming? From an interview with some random organization?

 

[BuckToothMoron]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

Apparently they are not the ones spiking temperature data.

 

[flacaltenn]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

One guy says he guesses that 40% of scientists doubt manmade global warming? From an interview with some random organization?

This is pretty much supported by the extensive polling of Bray and von Storch. The most comprehensive of surveys of Climate scientists available. They polled vetted folks in the field every 2 years for 6 years on a MASSIVE 100+ questions. Since any "poll" with just one or two questions is Bullshit if you're looking for considered consensus.

It's NOT a consensus on the more important technical issues. And upwards of 30% (back about 2 year now) expressed doubt on topics concerning modeling efficacy, confirming changing weather patterns, even the MATURITY of their OWN FIELD..

Look up those surveys. They are eye-opening -- compared to the political rhetoric about silly consensus.

 

[Montrovant]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

One guy says he guesses that 40% of scientists doubt manmade global warming? From an interview with some random organization?

This is pretty much supported by the extensive polling of Bray and von Storch. The most comprehensive of surveys of Climate scientists available. They polled vetted folks in the field every 2 years for 6 years on a MASSIVE 100+ questions. Since any "poll" with just one or two questions is Bullshit if you're looking for considered consensus.

It's NOT a consensus on the more important technical issues. And upwards of 30% (back about 2 year now) expressed doubt on topics concerning modeling efficacy, confirming changing weather patterns, even the MATURITY of their OWN FIELD..

Look up those surveys. They are eye-opening -- compared to the political rhetoric about silly consensus.

The 98% number has always seemed unlikely.

The 40% doubting manmade global warming from the OP seems like a number pulled out of thin air, though.

I looked up the Bray/von Storch surveys. If you consider any response other than a full 7 to be expressing doubt, than most of the climate scientists have doubt. If you go with those who answered with a 6 or 7, that bumps the number over 70% who believe in manmade climate change in 2013, closer to 75% in 2016. Far from the 97 or 98% number that gets tossed around, but also quite different from saying 40% of qualified scientists doubt manmade global warming. In fact, the Bray/von Storch surveys seem to indicate that belief among climate scientists in manmade global warming is increasing.

I went to Die Klimazwiebel for information: Die Klimazwiebel: Fifth Bray – von Storch International Survey of Climate Scientists completed

The survey seems to indicate that climate scientists increasingly believe that man is effecting the climate, but that there is not any sort of overwhelming consensus regarding all the details.

 

[flacaltenn]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

One guy says he guesses that 40% of scientists doubt manmade global warming? From an interview with some random organization?

This is pretty much supported by the extensive polling of Bray and von Storch. The most comprehensive of surveys of Climate scientists available. They polled vetted folks in the field every 2 years for 6 years on a MASSIVE 100+ questions. Since any "poll" with just one or two questions is Bullshit if you're looking for considered consensus.

It's NOT a consensus on the more important technical issues. And upwards of 30% (back about 2 year now) expressed doubt on topics concerning modeling efficacy, confirming changing weather patterns, even the MATURITY of their OWN FIELD..

Look up those surveys. They are eye-opening -- compared to the political rhetoric about silly consensus.

The 98% number has always seemed unlikely.

The 40% doubting manmade global warming from the OP seems like a number pulled out of thin air, though.

I looked up the Bray/von Storch surveys. If you consider any response other than a full 7 to be expressing doubt, than most of the climate scientists have doubt. If you go with those who answered with a 6 or 7, that bumps the number over 70% who believe in manmade climate change in 2013, closer to 75% in 2016. Far from the 97 or 98% number that gets tossed around, but also quite different from saying 40% of qualified scientists doubt manmade global warming. In fact, the Bray/von Storch surveys seem to indicate that belief among climate scientists in manmade global warming is increasing.

I went to Die Klimazwiebel for information: Die Klimazwiebel: Fifth Bray – von Storch International Survey of Climate Scientists completed

The survey seems to indicate that climate scientists increasingly believe that man is effecting the climate, but that there is not any sort of overwhelming consensus regarding all the details.

Depends on what Bray/Storch questions you LOOK at.. SOME are far more important than "is the earth warming" or "how much does man contribute".. Because of the LARGE number of questions, you zero on the tenets of GW theory.. So --- if 40% have doubts about the ability of the models to PREDICT anything that policy makers can act on --- that's actually more important. Because you won't know HOW MUCH the warming will be in 20 50 80 years out. And the one that threw me was all these superstars of GW calling their Climate community "an immature science". Which is true. Because it only really took off when we got advanced satellite capability in the 80s..

I see no real increase in "belief" on the many UNDERLYING questions of accuracy and maturity of the theory.. I as a skeptic about CATASTROPHIC GW actually go with the MAJORITY on the higher lever "silly" questions of "is the earth warming and does man have something to do with it".. I just doubt the parts of theory about accelerations, positive feedbacks and runaway effects that promote this issue to the CRISIS level it's been portrayed at.

You can't have consensus by asking ONE question on an issue this complex..

 

[Montrovant]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

One guy says he guesses that 40% of scientists doubt manmade global warming? From an interview with some random organization?

This is pretty much supported by the extensive polling of Bray and von Storch. The most comprehensive of surveys of Climate scientists available. They polled vetted folks in the field every 2 years for 6 years on a MASSIVE 100+ questions. Since any "poll" with just one or two questions is Bullshit if you're looking for considered consensus.

It's NOT a consensus on the more important technical issues. And upwards of 30% (back about 2 year now) expressed doubt on topics concerning modeling efficacy, confirming changing weather patterns, even the MATURITY of their OWN FIELD..

Look up those surveys. They are eye-opening -- compared to the political rhetoric about silly consensus.

The 98% number has always seemed unlikely.

The 40% doubting manmade global warming from the OP seems like a number pulled out of thin air, though.

I looked up the Bray/von Storch surveys. If you consider any response other than a full 7 to be expressing doubt, than most of the climate scientists have doubt. If you go with those who answered with a 6 or 7, that bumps the number over 70% who believe in manmade climate change in 2013, closer to 75% in 2016. Far from the 97 or 98% number that gets tossed around, but also quite different from saying 40% of qualified scientists doubt manmade global warming. In fact, the Bray/von Storch surveys seem to indicate that belief among climate scientists in manmade global warming is increasing.

I went to Die Klimazwiebel for information: Die Klimazwiebel: Fifth Bray – von Storch International Survey of Climate Scientists completed

The survey seems to indicate that climate scientists increasingly believe that man is effecting the climate, but that there is not any sort of overwhelming consensus regarding all the details.

Depends on what Bray/Storch questions you LOOK at.. SOME are far more important than "is the earth warming" or "how much does man contribute".. Because of the LARGE number of questions, you zero on the tenets of GW theory.. So --- if 40% have doubts about the ability of the models to PREDICT anything that policy makers can act on --- that's actually more important. Because you won't know HOW MUCH the warming will be in 20 50 80 years out. And the one that threw me was all these superstars of GW calling their Climate community "an immature science". Which is true. Because it only really took off when we got advanced satellite capability in the 80s..

I see no real increase in "belief" on the many UNDERLYING questions of accuracy and maturity of the theory.. I as a skeptic about CATASTROPHIC GW actually go with the MAJORITY on the higher lever "silly" questions of "is the earth warming and does man have something to do with it".. I just doubt the parts of theory about accelerations, positive feedbacks and runaway effects that promote this issue to the CRISIS level it's been portrayed at.

You can't have consensus by asking ONE question on an issue this complex..

I agree that it is a complex issue and cannot be accurately described by just saying mankind is or is not contributing to warming/climate change. The OP, however, seems to be trying to make it into such a simple equation, and that is what I took issue with.

 

[flacaltenn]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

One guy says he guesses that 40% of scientists doubt manmade global warming? From an interview with some random organization?

This is pretty much supported by the extensive polling of Bray and von Storch. The most comprehensive of surveys of Climate scientists available. They polled vetted folks in the field every 2 years for 6 years on a MASSIVE 100+ questions. Since any "poll" with just one or two questions is Bullshit if you're looking for considered consensus.

It's NOT a consensus on the more important technical issues. And upwards of 30% (back about 2 year now) expressed doubt on topics concerning modeling efficacy, confirming changing weather patterns, even the MATURITY of their OWN FIELD..

Look up those surveys. They are eye-opening -- compared to the political rhetoric about silly consensus.

The 98% number has always seemed unlikely.

The 40% doubting manmade global warming from the OP seems like a number pulled out of thin air, though.

I looked up the Bray/von Storch surveys. If you consider any response other than a full 7 to be expressing doubt, than most of the climate scientists have doubt. If you go with those who answered with a 6 or 7, that bumps the number over 70% who believe in manmade climate change in 2013, closer to 75% in 2016. Far from the 97 or 98% number that gets tossed around, but also quite different from saying 40% of qualified scientists doubt manmade global warming. In fact, the Bray/von Storch surveys seem to indicate that belief among climate scientists in manmade global warming is increasing.

I went to Die Klimazwiebel for information: Die Klimazwiebel: Fifth Bray – von Storch International Survey of Climate Scientists completed

The survey seems to indicate that climate scientists increasingly believe that man is effecting the climate, but that there is not any sort of overwhelming consensus regarding all the details.

Depends on what Bray/Storch questions you LOOK at.. SOME are far more important than "is the earth warming" or "how much does man contribute".. Because of the LARGE number of questions, you zero on the tenets of GW theory.. So --- if 40% have doubts about the ability of the models to PREDICT anything that policy makers can act on --- that's actually more important. Because you won't know HOW MUCH the warming will be in 20 50 80 years out. And the one that threw me was all these superstars of GW calling their Climate community "an immature science". Which is true. Because it only really took off when we got advanced satellite capability in the 80s..

I see no real increase in "belief" on the many UNDERLYING questions of accuracy and maturity of the theory.. I as a skeptic about CATASTROPHIC GW actually go with the MAJORITY on the higher lever "silly" questions of "is the earth warming and does man have something to do with it".. I just doubt the parts of theory about accelerations, positive feedbacks and runaway effects that promote this issue to the CRISIS level it's been portrayed at.

You can't have consensus by asking ONE question on an issue this complex..

I agree that it is a complex issue and cannot be accurately described by just saying mankind is or is not contributing to warming/climate change. The OP, however, seems to be trying to make it into such a simple equation, and that is what I took issue with.

Well sure. Giving a number in agreement on a scientific proposition is completely useless if you don't STATE what that proposition is. There's no way to measure "belief" in Global Warming without at least a couple dozen questions..

 

[Old Rocks]

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Sorry if I forget to follow up on USMB.

National Association of Scholars

​

Learn more from the Center for Media and Democracy's research on climate change.

The National Association of Scholars (NAS) is a non-profit organization in the United States that opposes multiculturalism and affirmative action and seeks to counter what it considers a "liberal bias" in academia.[1]

In 2010 and 2011, its president was espousing climate contrarianism under the group's auspices, with no evident expertise in the climate science field.[2]

The Association's officers are not answerable to its membership: according to its 2009 IRS Form 990 (Part VI Section A), the Association doesn't have members (line 6), members don't elect the officers (line 7a), and the decisions of the governing body are not subject to members' approval (line 7b).[3] Mid-2000s IRS filings also indicate that the Association was controlled by 0 or 1 person.

The Association's major foundation donor is the Sarah Scaife Foundation. By 2009, the majority of the Association's revenue came from "educational partnerships", the funding for which is winding down. While the NAS continues to describe itself as "an independent membership association of academics..."[4], in late 2009 membership was opened to all.[5]

Anyone interested in a more thorough report on this organization should read the later parts of John Mashey's 34pp "Bottling Nonsense" pdf, in the Resources section below.

National Association of Scholars - SourceWatch

Not a reputable source to go to on scientific issues.

 

[Old Rocks]

PRINCETON, NJ (January 3, 2011)—S. Fred Singer said in an interview with the National Association of Scholars (NAS) that “the number of skeptical qualified scientists has been growing steadily; I would guess it is about 40% now.”

Singer, a leading scientific skeptic of anthropocentric global warming (AGW), is an atmospheric physicist, and founder of the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP), an organization that began challenging the published findings of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in the 1990s. SEPP established the Leipzig Declaration, a statement of dissent from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol that has been signed by over one hundred scientists and meteorologists.

Estimated 40 Percent of Scientists Doubt Manmade Global Warming | National Association of Scholars

Siegfried Frederick Singer (S. Fred Singer), born September 1924 (age 93), a former space scientist and government scientific administrator, runs the Science and Environmental Policy Project (SEPP)[1] This phantom organisation publicizes his own views on various topics, primarily climate change, ozone depletion, risks of chemical pollution (from DDT and others), nuclear power, and space policy.

SEPP was set up by APCO & Associates (the PR firm controlled by Philip Morris) at the same time they set up another junk-science operation for the tobacco industry, Steven J Milloy's The Advancement of Sound Science Coalition(TASSC). These were two arms of the same strategy to denigrate science itself -- and enlist other industries like oil, energy, coal, chemicals, etc behind the tort-reform and anti-regulatory stance necessary for the cigarette business to survive at the same high profit level.

Singer was the front of the organisation, but it also involved his wife Candace Crandall and her brother Robert Crandall (Brookings Institution).

S. Fred Singer - SourceWatch

Singer has no credibility in the scientific community.

 

[flacaltenn]

The Association's officers are not answerable to its membership: according to its 2009 IRS Form 990 (Part VI Section A), the Association doesn't have members (line 6), members don't elect the officers (line 7a), and the decisions of the governing body are not subject to members' approval (line 7b)

Well GOOOOLLLY OldieRocks. That situation of "decisions of the governing body are NOT SUBJECT TO MEMBER'S approval"" --- That hasn't stopped you from posting (probably 43 times) that horribly long list of scientific orgs that write politically correct Global Warming statements now -- has it?

Why oh why would it bother it you now??

 

[Old Rocks]

Mr. Flacaltenn, most of the membership of the real scientific societies are on board concerning the societies statements on climate change and global warming. If you have proof of it being otherwise, just post it.

List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations - Office of Planning and Research

So what you are saying is that all those scientific societies have a membership that have no say in what their policy is on global warming? I think you need a bit more tinfoil for your little hat.

 

[catatomic]

Thanks for your interest... I just remembered this thread. No I didn't mean my thread to be the end all of climate research.

 

[skookerasbil]

Insignificant to the AGW k00ks........but clearly having an effect in the real world outside the "science". Its not even debatable. Frankly.......the k00ks still haven't made their case after 25 years. How do we know? Because energy policy hasn't changed for shit anywhere in the world. Fossil fuels still dominate and will for decades. Again..............not even debatable.

 

[skookerasbil]

Mr. Flacaltenn, most of the membership of the real scientific societies are on board concerning the societies statements on climate change and global warming. If you have proof of it being otherwise, just post it.

List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations - Office of Planning and Research

So what you are saying is that all those scientific societies have a membership that have no say in what their policy is on global warming? I think you need a bit more tinfoil for your little hat.

Where are these "scientific societies" mattering in the real world? The answer is.........they are not mattering. Nobody is caring about debating points in the real world!

 

[catatomic]

Thanks for your interest... I just remembered this thread. No I didn't mean my thread to be the end all of climate research.

Let me add though that with fuzzy logic my own personal belief is a lot lower in manmade global warming after reading the article.

 

[Old Rocks]

Carbon Dioxide (ppm)
The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has risen by 25% since 1958, and by about 40% since the Industrial Revolution.

Global Average Temperature (˚C)
The temperature near Earth’s surface is rising: the bars show each year’s average temperature compared to the 20th century average

Spring Snow Cover (million km2)
Snow is melting earlier: each bar shows spring snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere compared to the long-term average.

Maps & Data | NOAA Climate.gov

Ah yes, 40% of scientists doubt this? LOL You fools would believe an article that quotes the whore that is Singer, who is now a senile old fool, too doddering to put in front of the public. We see that the 'Conservatives' throw doubt on all of our institutions now, exactly what Putin has been working for. You assholes are tools, and too fucking stupid to see it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The science of "Climate Change" (Formerly know as: Global Warming, or Global Cooling or Climate Disruption) consists of nothing more than pointing to the top story on the Weather Channel and shrieking, "CLIMATE CHANGE!!!!!! IN YOUR FACE!!!! THAT'S HOW WE ROLL!!!"

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Ask for a lab experiment demonstrating the relationship between temperature changes given teeny, tiny changes in CO2 and you get called -- wait for it, yes, you guessed it - a DENIER!!!

 

[IsaacNewton]