Peer Reviewed Study: MOST scientists reject "man made" climate change!!

[skookerasbil]

Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.



Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis - Forbes




Ooooooooops

 

[skookerasbil]

An instructive cartoon for the bozo's who buy into the whole "settled science" myth...........

 

[skookerasbil]

Evidently.......the whole "man made" theory of global warming is collapsing. Here are some of the pertinent questions that the religion cant come to grips with but don't want you to know about >>

After-the-fact explanations don’t work. They evoke all kinds of questions:

1.Why aren’t the alternative explanations already accounted for?
2.Why did IPCC models fail to predict the “hiatus”?
3.Why are IPCC models off by 0.4°C?
4.How come +0.5°C of +0.85°C rise since 1880 occurred in just 20 years?
5.Why then did temperature rise suddenly stop after that 20 years?
6.Can IPCC assessment reports be trusted?
7.Are IPCC predictions about extreme weather reliable?

Read more at Human-caused global warming theory weakening | Communities Digital News - New




Everywhere you look, the AGW folks are becoming the flat earthers in 2014

 

[mamooth]

Skook, could you keep all your idiot spam in your one circle-jerk thread, and not interrupt the grownups? Thanks.

Oh, good work with the study showing Petroleum Engineers don't accept AGW theory. That was a real shocker. But why did you lie and call them "scientists"?

 

[ScienceRocks]

And all these scientist are all silenced by Obama. Right?

 

[Abraham3]

You can hardly blame Skookerasnoc for his faulty terminology. He takes it straight from the article. The author, James Taylor, is the spokesperson for the Heartland Institute and has been lying about these sort of issues for years.

What I do blame Skooksikooks for is not recognizing that this is the same stupid survey of Canadian oil field workers that the DENIALISTs pop up every few months. Surely you'd think he'd recognize it and realize that if it was familiar to him, it would be familiar to absolutely anyone over the age of zero. Y'know?

 

[skookerasbil]

Am always fascinated how full blown mental the k00ks get when anything is posted that whacks the shit out the established narrative. The mofu's are so fragile......their whole world built around this AGW stuff.

Once in a blue moon I start a new thread and these people start stripping their teeth and spitting at the monitor as they bang on the keys!! Whats up with that? I come in here to have fun and for the entertainment value. Here......I simply point out that the whole "man made" stuff isn't nearly as universal as the committed AGW crowd whats people to believe.......and that most scientists know that when you cant prove anything its NOT science.

 

[Abraham3]

Sorry Skooks, but that's not what you did and everyone here knows it. The reason you have nothing good to put up here in the way of a rational, objective and scientifically supportable argument is that you're attempting to argue a false point. You'd have the same problem if you decided to argue thaat the Earth is flat, that demons cause disease and that all the stars are fireflies attached to giant, nested crystal balls.

 

[Old Rocks]

Whatever Organizational Studies is, it is not a peer reviewed scientific journal. And when you have to start your article with a quote from an ass like Senator Inhofe, you know that the article would never have passed peer review in a real scientific journal;

Science or Science Fiction? Professionals? Discursive Construction of Climate Change

Introduction

With all of the hysteria, all of the fear, all of the phony science, could it be that man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people? (Inhofe, 2003)
Climate change profoundly challenges governmental, non-governmental and private organizations (Hoffman & Woody, 2008) by creating pressure for emission reduction goals and adaptation measures. Alongside these actions, the debate continues in some quarters as to the causes and consequences of global climate change – and, more importantly, potential directions of public policies and organizational strategies. The United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), representing the work of about 2,000 individuals, contends that recent global warming is a direct result of human activities for which we should mitigate the effects (IPCC, 2007a, 2007b). In contrast, ‘climate sceptics’ (as per Antonio & Brulle, 2011; Hamilton, 2010; Hoffman, 2011a, 2011b; Kahan, Jenkins-Smith & Braman, 2010; Levy & Rothenberg, 2002; McCright & Dunlap, 2000, 2011) have argued that the climate is changing due to natural causes and have countered with their own experts’ reports.

There is not a single scientfic society in the world that supports the views in this article. The organization with the most scientists dealing with climate is the American Geophyisical Union. And here is it's statement on global warming;

http://sciencepolicy.agu.org/files/2013/07/AGU-Climate-Change-Position-Statement_August-2013.pdf

Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years.
Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes.
Human activities are changing Earth’s climate. At the global level, atmospheric
concentrations of carbon dioxide and other heat‐trapping greenhouse gases have increased
sharply since the Industrial Revolution. Fossil fuel burning dominates this increase.
Human‐caused increases in greenhouse gases are responsible for most of the observed
global average surface warming of roughly 0.8°C (1.5°F) over the past 140 years. Because
natural processes cannot quickly remove some of these gases (notably carbon dioxide)
from the atmosphere, our past, present, and future emissions will influence the climate
system for millennia.
Extensive, independent observations confirm the reality of global warming. These
observations show large‐scale increases in air and sea temperatures, sea level, and
atmospheric water vapor; they document decreases in the extent of mountain glaciers,
snow cover, permafrost, and Arctic sea ice. These changes are broadly consistent with longunderstood
physics and predictions of how the climate system is expected to respond to
human‐caused increases in greenhouse gases. The changes are inconsistent with
explanations of climate change that rely on known natural influences.
Climate models predict that global temperatures will continue to rise, with the amount of
warming primarily determined by the level of emissions. Higher emissions of greenhouse
gases will lead to larger warming, and greater risks to society and ecosystems. Some
additional warming is unavoidable due to past emissions.

 

[skookerasbil]

The authors of the survey report, however, note that the overwhelming majority of scientists fall within four other models, each of which is skeptical of alarmist global warming claims

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis - Forbes


People on the far left are fascinating. Even when it is right there in black and white before your eyes........

Far left people will say anything.......we see the POTUS do it almost every day. It is called engineered reality to build consensus reality. It is how they operate with most every issue but climate science is the most in your face load of BS of them all.

Anyway.....fact is, nobody is caring about this alarmist view anyway. The entire world views it with a huge yawn.......clearly displayed by going through a few pages of THIS link >>>>


http://www.usmessageboard.com/environment/313851-more-proof-the-skeptics-are-winning.html



97%........26%.......0%......or any number in between isn't mattering. The alarmist view is laughable. These losers have been trumpeting this same shit for 25 years and nothing has changed in the real world ( click link above ). These jackasses are taking bows over solar energy which now provides........ready for this.........0.2% of our electricity.



The fact is, most scientists think the alarmist view is bogus. Additionally, in 2009, it was clearly established that the whole process is rigged >>>

Climate Change Emails Reveal Rigged 'Consensus' - WSJ.com

 

[skookerasbil]

 

[skookerasbil]

Anyway......heres the poop........

Nobody gives a shit what you or I think about the 97% question. What matters is, a huge majority of the people think the scientists are fucking with the data >>>


69% Say It?s Likely Scientists Have Falsified Global Warming Research - Rasmussen Reports?



So go post up some more peer reviewed internet drivel.....knock yourselves out.



Nobody cares.

 

[ScienceRocks]

I agree that the scientist must attempt to correct that belief within a ever increasing percentage of the population. The problem is most scientist aren't very good at discussing things with the population in general....

 

[Abraham3]

People on the far left are fascinating. Even when it is right there in black and white before your eyes........

People calling themselves Skookerasbil are fascinating. Even when the truth is before them in black and white, right before their very eyes, they cling to their unsupportable fantasies with desperate tenacity. Forbes and the WSJ are NOT acceptable sources of scientific information on these topics - they are both extremely biased and have been shown to be dishonest on this topic PER POLICY. Taylor calls the subjects of that Canadian survey "scientists" but we all know that is a demonstrable LIE. He knows it too. He just thinks you're so stupid, you'll believe him and try to spread his LIES to those around you. Or that you're so desperate to save face and money, you won't care that it's a LIE. Which is it Skooks?

 

[Geaux4it]

Global warming is the radical leftist loons version of the pubs FEMA Camps

-Geaux

 

[Abraham3]

Is this the new conservative strategy? Science by cartoon?

And do you now believe that 98% of the world's active climate scientists are "radical leftist loons"?

Before posting, do you ever think to yourself "how stupid is this going to make me look"?

 

[Geaux4it]

Is this the new conservative strategy? Science by cartoon?

And do you now believe that 98% of the world's active climate scientists are "radical leftist loons"?

Before posting, do you ever think to yourself "how stupid is this going to make me look"?

Is this the new conservative strategy? Science by cartoon?

It deserves nothing more. BTW- pictures work better for the radical leftist loons

And do you now believe that 98% of the world's active climate scientists are "radical leftist loons"?

Yes

Before posting, do you ever think to yourself "how stupid is this going to make me look"?

LMAO- Kettle, meet pot

-Geaux

 

[skookerasbil]

People on the far left are fascinating. Even when it is right there in black and white before your eyes........

People calling themselves Skookerasbil are fascinating.

How about spelling it backwards........genius!!

 

[skookerasbil]

Maybe we should make this another WINNING thread!!!



Matthew.......Abe........what do you think??

 

[Old Rocks]

At some point, the inevitable results of the GHGs that we have introduced to the atmosphere will be evident to all. At that point, someone will finally point out who understood the consequences, and denied them simply because that would have created a situation where they added less to their already immense wealth. When this happens, you will see a backlash that will make the changes to society resulting from the '30' look paltry.