New ACTUAL survey of Climate Scientist Opinions. About 100 detailed questions.

[flacaltenn]

To have a "consensus" you need a question. And if that question isn't comprehensive enough or phrased right -- the "consensus" is worthless. So it is with the phony 97% question. Didn't even ASK Climate scientists anything. They looked in scientific papers for opinion. Which is a really really really bad place to find "opinion".

So --- there's been a series of COMPREHENSIVE surveys done amongst Climate scientists by a PROMINENT climate scientist. And he asked ALL the pertinent questions. About 100 of them. I'm having an issue extracting from the paper right now because my partner has my laptop on the road for a demo and I can't EDIT the PDF which is NOT in open printing right now. I got it from an academic feed I subscribe to. But to tantalize you a bit and disappoint all our warmers, I'll screenshot a few interesting questions and responses, a few at a time and toss them up. You can find the 2 year old version of this survey in the open lit on line.

Let's start with these two... From Bray and von Storch --- 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists. 2015/2016

 

[The Irish Ram]

That 97% of scientists that Obama told us believe in global warming, was actually 7 scientists from an online survey.

 

[flacaltenn]

So that answers the question of how much science the WORKERS feel has been distorted by media and politics.

And the question of models be robust enough to accurately make 50 year projections on "severe storms" and hurricanes.

While there is GENERAL consensus that the public should be alerted to this matter and that the general consensus is that there is there are things to worry about, there is LESS of consensus about the tools and methods that they have now to "predict the future". Even the general questions of what PERCENTAGE man is contributing to the warming --- about 48% of climate scientists attribute it to be above 75%...

Confidence that SOMETHING is happening has slowly increased in each new version of the survey. But they are still struggling with their role in public awareness and informing the the proper decision makers.

 

[PredFan]

The left's global warming/climate change/climate disruption scam will soon be exposed. But will anyone care? I have come to believe that people love to be lied to.

 

[flacaltenn]

That 97% of scientists that Obama told us believe in global warming, was actually 7 scientists from an online survey.

I heard it was the brainchild of 2 former failed cartoonists -- now global warming activists, who decided to include all the papers that had NO OPINION stated in the Abstracts they reviewed.

But it does not matter. THESE surveys actually mean a LOT. It shows a general consensus, nowhere as simple or large as 97% on whether it's warming and does man play a role. But it's much more reserved about tossing out alarmist claptrap and numbers that don't carry high confidence in the modeling for 50 to 100 yrs out.

And these workers are AWARE that public probably has received a condensed and distorted version of the science.

 

[Crick]

To have a "consensus" you need a question. And if that question isn't comprehensive enough or phrased right -- the "consensus" is worthless. So it is with the phony 97% question. Didn't even ASK Climate scientists anything. They looked in scientific papers for opinion. Which is a really really really bad place to find "opinion".

So --- there's been a series of COMPREHENSIVE surveys done amongst Climate scientists by a PROMINENT climate scientist. And he asked ALL the pertinent questions. About 100 of them. I'm having an issue extracting from the paper right now because my partner has my laptop on the road for a demo and I can't EDIT the PDF which is NOT in open printing right now. I got it from an academic feed I subscribe to. But to tantalize you a bit and disappoint all our warmers, I'll screenshot a few interesting questions and responses, a few at a time and toss them up. You can find the 2 year old version of this survey in the open lit on line.

Let's start with these two... From Bray and von Storch --- 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists. 2015/2016

Neither of your teasers made any attempt to measure their acceptance of the validity of AGW

 

[Crick]

How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, the result of anthropogenic causes? (v007)
not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 very much

The entire report may be seen at The Bray and von Storch 5 th International Survey of Climate Scientists 2015/2016

 

[Crick]

Since 1850, it is estimated that the world has warmed by 0.5 – 0.7 degrees C. Approximately what percent would you attribute to human causes? (v013)

1=0% 2=1-25% 3=25-50% 4=51-75% 5=76-100%

 

[Crick]

23
Figure 14. (v011d) The current state of scientific knowledge is developed well enough to allow for a reasonable estimate of the effects of greenhouse gases from anthropogenic sources on climate?

 

[Crick]

Figure 15. (v012a) How would you rate the ability of global climate models to simulate aglobal mean value for temperature values for the next 10 years?

 

[Crick]

Off to work. Enjoy the "tease".

 

[SSDD]

And still not a shred of observed, measured, quantified, empirical data that supports the A in the AGW hypothesis....even this poll shows more confidence in the claim that mankind is altering the global climate via his CO2 emissions than the actual evidence allows...which is zero. Grant money and the prospect of grant money is still doing most of the talking.

 

[Crick]

Not my thread. If you don't like it, get on FCT's case. I'm sure he'd appreciate your insightful criticisms.

 

[flacaltenn]

Figure 15. (v012a) How would you rate the ability of global climate models to simulate aglobal mean value for temperature values for the next 10 years?

View attachment 85617

So what CONSENSUS is shown in that graph? If you cannot estimate the actual SCOPE of "the crisis" -- what is the true meaning of any CONSENSUS?

 

[flacaltenn]

23
Figure 14. (v011d) The current state of scientific knowledge is developed well enough to allow for a reasonable estimate of the effects of greenhouse gases from anthropogenic sources on climate?


View attachment 85616

That leaves about 25% not quite convinced. OK --- How do you DO THAT. If the next chart you posted shows only 40% convinced of the abiility to make 10 year projections.

 

[flacaltenn]

Since 1850, it is estimated that the world has warmed by 0.5 – 0.7 degrees C. Approximately what percent would you attribute to human causes? (v013)

1=0% 2=1-25% 3=25-50% 4=51-75% 5=76-100%

That's less than 50% of the survey attributing MORE than 75% of the warming to human causes.
You think THAT is a consensus on an ACTUAL question?

Did you see all the doubt about whether the exact nature of future weather changes could even be determined 50 years out? Or whether GoldiRocks can actually claim that CURRENT extreme weather events were "proof" of climate change?


THIS is the sane RATIONAL view of the science that SHOULD become the basis for public policy. NOT propaganda and alarmism.

 

[Crick]

Figure 15. (v012a) How would you rate the ability of global climate models to simulate aglobal mean value for temperature values for the next 10 years?

View attachment 85617

So what CONSENSUS is shown in that graph? If you cannot estimate the actual SCOPE of "the crisis" -- what is the true meaning of any CONSENSUS?

AGW does not include "the scope of the crisis" as any of its critical parameters, does it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, the result of anthropogenic causes? (v007)
not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 very much

The entire report may be seen at The Bray and von Storch 5 th International Survey of Climate Scientists 2015/2016

Falls short of 97%

 

[Crick]

Since 1850, it is estimated that the world has warmed by 0.5 – 0.7 degrees C. Approximately what percent would you attribute to human causes? (v013)

1=0% 2=1-25% 3=25-50% 4=51-75% 5=76-100%

That's less than 50% of the survey attributing MORE than 75% of the warming to human causes.
You think THAT is a consensus on an ACTUAL question?
[/quote]

YOU put this survey up. If you don't think the questions are valid, why the big sales pitch? Besides, the standard criterial is whether or not human causes represent more than 50% of causation. This survey finds over 80% or respondents agree it is the primary cause.

You're not having problems reading simple graphs are you?

Did you see all the doubt about whether the exact nature of future weather changes could even be determined 50 years out?

"Exact nature"... "50 years out". Get real. Can you hear yourself?

Or whether GoldiRocks can actually claim that CURRENT extreme weather events were "proof" of climate change?

Are you now suggesting that our climate is not changing? I didn't realize there was any doubt on that issue.

THIS is the sane RATIONAL view of the science that SHOULD become the basis for public policy. NOT propaganda and alarmism.

You mean, this consensus rather than the prior consensus? You mean you go along with expert consensus as long as it goes along with your unqualified opinion?

 

[Crick]

How convinced are you that most of recent or near future climate change is, or will be, the result of anthropogenic causes? (v007)
not at all 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 very much

The entire report may be seen at The Bray and von Storch 5 th International Survey of Climate Scientists 2015/2016

Falls short of 97%

I get 95.225%