- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #41
Climate is longer time weather. It is still weather. I think you criticized this in bad faith. Steam is not climate.
Einstein of climate
- Thread starter Robert W
- Start date
ReinyDays
Gold Member
Climate and weather are exactly the same ... except weather uses dt and climate uses ∆t ... where ∆t >= 100 years ... I understand this is physics, and not mathematics, but the math is succinct ...
dt is why a full year of college calculus is required before we're allowed to take meteorology ... and an second full year of college calculus before climatology ... and a full year of college statistics ...
The word "change" is well defined in science ... the mathy term is "first derivative" ... and if I may be "indiscreet" F = m dv/dt ... ha ha get it ... indiscreet ... math joke there ...
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #43
At some point you converted from a curious person to a devoted to the worst of all predictions for humans. Wish I knew why given you are an engineer.
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #44
That is accurate.
It is not. Reiny's attempts to show off his calculs and meteorology skill fails. Observing a climate change does not require watching for 100 years or more and dt may be used with either one if you happen to be looking for instantaneous rates.
That is accept the conclusions of better than 95% of the world's climate scientists and reject the conclusion of someone who opposes them? On a thousand other topics, Robert, you are guilty of the EXACT same choices.
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #46
How do you know that better than 95% have such conclusions?
Especially since some expert climatologists say that is not true?
If someone told you a foot is a meter would you believe them if they told you 95 percent claim this is the case?
From Scientific consensus on climate change - Wikipedia
Scientific consensus on climate change
There is a nearly unanimous scientific consensus that the Earth has been consistently warming since the start of the Industrial Revolution, that the rate of recent warming is largely unprecedented,[1]: 8 [2]: 11 and that this warming is mainly the result of a rapid increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) caused by human activities. The human activities causing this warming include fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and land use changes such as deforestation,[3]: 10–11 with a significant supporting role from the other greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide.[1]: 7 This human role in climate change is considered "unequivocal" and "incontrovertible".[1]: 4 [2]: 4
Nearly all actively publishing climate scientists say humans are causing climate change.[4][5] Surveys of the scientific literature are another way to measure scientific consensus. A 2019 review of scientific papers found the consensus on the cause of climate change to be at 100%,[6] and a 2021 study concluded that over 99% of scientific papers agree on the human cause of climate change.[7] The small percentage of papers that disagreed with the consensus often contain errors or cannot be replicated.[8]
The evidence for global warming due to human influence has been recognized by the national science academies of all the major industrialized countries.[9] In the scientific literature, there is a very strong consensus that global surface temperatures have increased in recent decades and that the trend is caused by human-induced emissions of greenhouse gases.[10] No scientific body of national or international standing disagrees with this view.[11] A few organizations with members in extractive industries hold non-committal positions,[12] and some have tried to persuade the public that climate change is not happening, or if the climate is changing it is not because of human influence,[13][14] attempting to sow doubt in the scientific consensus.[15]
Existence of a scientific consensus
The public substantially underestimates the degree of scientific consensus that humans are causing climate change.[16] Studies from 2019 to 2021[17][18][19] found scientific consensus to range from 98.7–100%.Studies of the scientific opinion on climate change have been undertaken since the 1970s,[20] and they have been establishing widespread consensus since the 1990s,[21][22] with the level of agreement increasing over time.[23] Individual scientists, universities, and laboratories contribute to the scientific opinion on climate change via their peer-reviewed publications, while the scientific bodies of national or international standing summarise the areas of collective agreement and relative certainty in synthesis reports.[24]
Examples of such reports include or the 2004 Arctic Climate Impact Assessment from the International Arctic Science Committee and the governments of the Arctic Council,[25][26] or the United States' National Climate Assessment, which has been released periodically since 2000 under the auspices of the United States Global Change Research Program. The fourth NCA, released in 2017, involved the efforts of thirteen federal agencies, led by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),[27] and around "1,000 people, including 300 leading scientists, roughly half from outside the government."[28]
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) had been formed by the United Nations in 1988,[29][30] and it presents reports summarizing the strength and extent of consensus on climate change and its numerous aspects to the member states of the United Nations, with the major reports released at 5-to-7-year intervals starting from 1990.[31]
Between 1990 and 2023, the IPCC has published six comprehensive assessment reports reviewing the latest climate science. The IPCC has also produced 14 special reports on particular topics.[32] Each assessment report has four parts. These are a contribution from each of the three working groups, plus a synthesis report. The synthesis report integrates the working group contributions. It also integrates any special reports produced in that assessment cycle.
In 2001, science academies from 17 countries (Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Malaysia, New Zealand, Sweden, Trinidad, Turkey and the United Kingdom made a joint statement endorsing the work of IPCC. They concurred that the temperatures are rising and will continue to rise due to human activities, and also stressed the importance of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, concluding that "Business as usual is no longer a viable option". It is also notable for being one of the first statements to explicitly use the term "consensus".[33] In 2005, another joint statement from the science academies of major countries (Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Italy, Japan, Russia, United Kingdom and the United States referred to the conclusions of the IPCC as "the international scientific consensus", and urged prompt action on both climate change mitigation and climate change adaptation.[34] Elsewhere around the world, other organizations to have referred to the scientific consensus include Network of African Science Academies in 2007,[35] and the International Union for Quaternary Research in 2008.[36]
In 2013, a study which found that out of over 4,000 peer-reviewed papers on climate science published since 1990, 97% agree, explicitly or implicitly, that global warming is happening and is human-caused.[37][38] Surveys of scientists' views on climate change – with a focus on human caused climate change – have been undertaken since the 1970s.[20][21] A 2016 reanalysis confirmed that "the finding of 97% consensus [that humans are causing recent global warming] in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies."[39] A 2019 study found scientific consensus to be at 100%,[6] and a 2021 study found that consensus exceeded 99%.[7]
This has been an excerpt. There is more in the Wikipedia article at the link provided. Here are the endnotes from that article.
References
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o IPCC, 2021: Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, A. Pirani, S.L. Connors, C. Péan, S. Berger, N. Caud, Y. Chen, L. Goldfarb, M. I. Gomis, M. Huang, K. Leitzell, E. Lonnoy, J. B. R. Matthews, T. K. Maycock, T. Waterfield, O. Yelekçi, R. Yu, and B. Zhou (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York City, US, pp. 3–32, doi:10.1017/9781009157896.001.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f g h i j k l m Marvel, K., W. Su, R. Delgado, S. Aarons, A. Chatterjee, M.E. Garcia, Z. Hausfather, K. Hayhoe, D.A. Hence, E.B. Jewett, A. Robel, D. Singh, A. Tripati, and R.S. Vose, 2023: Chapter 2. Climate trends. In: Fifth National Climate Assessment. Crimmins, A.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, B.C. Stewart, and T.K. Maycock, Eds. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA. doi:10.7930/NCA5.2023.CH2
- ^ "Total radiative forcing is positive and has led to an uptake of energy by the climate system. The largest contribution to total radiative forcing is caused by the increase in the atmospheric concentration of CO2 since 1750." and "From 1750 to 2011, CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion and cement production have released 375 [345 to 405] GtC to the atmosphere, while deforestation and other land-use change are estimated to have released 180 [100 to 260] GtC." In: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Allen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c Myers, Krista F.; Doran, Peter T.; Cook, John; Kotcher, John E.; Myers, Teresa A. (20 October 2021). "Consensus revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years later". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (10): 104030. Bibcode:2021ERL....16j4030M. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774. S2CID 239047650.
- ^ John Cook; et al. (April 2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d Powell, James Lawrence (20 November 2019). "Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 37 (4): 183–184. doi:10.1177/0270467619886266. S2CID 213454806. Retrieved 15 November 2020.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d Lynas, Mark; Houlton, Benjamin Z.; Perry, Simon (19 October 2021). "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (11): 114005. Bibcode:2021ERL....16k4005L. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966. S2CID 239032360.
- ^ Benestad, Rasmus E.; Nuccitelli, Dana; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Hayhoe, Katharine; Hygen, Hans Olav; van Dorland, Rob; Cook, John (1 November 2016). "Learning from mistakes in climate research". Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 126 (3): 699–703. Bibcode:2016ThApC.126..699B. doi:10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5. ISSN 1434-4483.
- ^ "Joint Science Academies' Statement" (PDF). 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-09-09. Retrieved 2014-04-20. It is likely that most of the warming in recent decades can be attributed to human activities (IPCC 2001). This warming has already led to changes in the Earth's climate.
- ^ "'Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis.' IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, Working Group I, Summary for Policymakers. 'The best estimate of the human-induced contribution to warming is similar to the observed warming over this period.'" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 22 October 2018. Retrieved 26 December 2018.
- ^ Julie Brigham-Grette; et al. (September 2006). "Petroleum Geologists' Award to Novelist Crichton Is Inappropriate". Eos. 87 (36): 364. Bibcode:2006EOSTr..87..364B. doi:10.1029/2006EO360008. The AAPG stands alone among scientific societies in its denial of human-induced effects on global warming.
- ^ DiMento, Joseph F. C.; Doughman, Pamela M. (2007). Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. The MIT Press. p. 68. ISBN 978-0-262-54193-0.
- ^ Stoddard, Isak; Anderson, Kevin; Capstick, Stuart; Carton, Wim; Depledge, Joanna; Facer, Keri; Gough, Clair; Hache, Frederic; Hoolohan, Claire; Hultman, Martin; Hällström, Niclas; Kartha, Sivan; Klinsky, Sonja; Kuchler, Magdalena; Lövbrand, Eva; Nasiritousi, Naghmeh; Newell, Peter; Peters, Glen P.; Sokona, Youba; Stirling, Andy; Stilwell, Matthew; Spash, Clive L.; Williams, Mariama; et al. (18 October 2021). "Three Decades of Climate Mitigation: Why Haven't We Bent the Global Emissions Curve?". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 46 (1): 653–689. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104. hdl:1983/93c742bc-4895-42ac-be81-535f36c5039d. ISSN 1543-5938. S2CID 233815004. Retrieved 31 August 2022.
- ^ Mann, Michael E.; Toles, Tom (2016). The Madhouse Effect. New York Chichester, West Sussex: Columbia University Press. doi:10.7312/mann17786. ISBN 978-0231541817.
- ^ Oreskes, Naomi; Conway, Erik (2012). Merchants of doubt : how a handful of scientists obscured the truth on issues from tobacco smoke to global warming. Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-1408824832. OCLC 934374946.
- ^ "Public perceptions on climate change" (PDF). PERITIA Trust EU – The Policy Institute of King's College London. June 2022. p. 4. Archived (PDF) from the original on 15 July 2022.
- ^ Powell, James (20 November 2019). "Scientists Reach 100% Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 37 (4): 183–184. doi:10.1177/0270467619886266. S2CID 213454806.
- ^ Lynas, Mark; Houlton, Benjamin Z.; Perry, Simon (19 October 2021). "Greater than 99% consensus on human caused climate change in the peer-reviewed scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (11): 114005. Bibcode:2021ERL....16k4005L. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2966. S2CID 239032360.
- ^ Myers, Krista F.; Doran, Peter T.; Cook, John; Kotcher, John E.; Myers, Teresa A. (20 October 2021). "Consensus revisited: quantifying scientific agreement on climate change and climate expertise among Earth scientists 10 years later". Environmental Research Letters. 16 (10): 104030. Bibcode:2021ERL....16j4030M. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/ac2774. S2CID 239047650.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c Climate Change to the Year 2000: A Survey of Expert Opinion (PDF) (Report). February 1978.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c d e Stewart, Thomas R.; Mumpower, Jeryl L.; Reagan-Cirincione, Patricia (April 1992). Scientists' Agreement and Disagreement about Global Climate Change: Evidence from Surveys (PDF) (Report).
- ^ Jump up to:a b Bray, Dennis; Hans von Storch (1999). "Climate Science: An Empirical Example of Postnormal Science" (PDF). Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 80 (3): 439–455. Bibcode:1999BAMS...80..439B. doi:10.1175/1520-0477(1999)080<0439:CSAEEO>2.0.CO;2. ISSN 1520-0477.
- ^ Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; Verheggen, Bart; Maibach, Ed W.; Carlton, J. Stuart; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Skuce, Andrew G.; Green, Sarah A.; Nuccitelli, Dana; Jacobs, Peter; Richardson, Mark; Winkler, Bärbel; Painting, Rob; Rice, Ken (2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002. ISSN 1748-9326.
- ^ Oreskes, Naomi (2007). "The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change: How Do We Know We're Not Wrong?". In DiMento, Joseph F. C.; Doughman, Pamela M. (eds.). Climate Change: What It Means for Us, Our Children, and Our Grandchildren. MIT Press. pp. 65–66. ISBN 978-0-262-54193-0.
- ^ "ACIA Display". Amap.no. Archived from the original on 14 December 2010. Retrieved 30 July 2012.
- ^ "Impacts of a Warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact Assessment New Scientific Consensus: Arctic Is Warming Rapidly". UNEP/GRID-Arendal. 8 November 2004. Retrieved 20 January 2010.
- ^ "US Government Agencies Participating in the USGCRP". Agencies. USGCRP. 20 October 2008. Retrieved November 23, 2018.
- ^ Christensen, Jen; Nedelman, Michael (November 23, 2018). "Climate change will shrink US economy and kill thousands, government report warns". CNN. Retrieved November 23, 2018.
- ^ "About the IPCC". Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Retrieved 22 February 2019.
- ^ "UN General Assembly Resolution 43/53 "Protection of global climate for present and future generations of mankind"" (PDF). UN General Assembly Resolutions 43rd Session 1988–1989. United Nations.
- ^ "Annex C to Appendix C to the Principles Governing IPCC Work". IPCC Procedures. IPCC.
- ^ "The IPCC: Who Are They and Why Do Their Climate Reports Matter?". Union of Concerned Scientists: Reports & Multimedia - Activist Resources: Explainers. Union of Concerned Scientists. 11 October 2018.
- ^ Australian Academy of Sciences; Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts; Brazilian Academy of Sciences; Royal Society of Canada; Caribbean Academy of Sciences; Chinese Academy of Sciences; French Academy of Sciences; German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina; Indian National Science Academy; Indonesian Academy of Sciences; Royal Irish Academy; Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei (Italy); Academy of Sciences Malaysia; Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand; Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Turkish Academy of Sciences; Royal Society (UK) (18 May 2001). "The Science of Climate Change". Science. 292 (5520). Science Magazine: 1261. doi:10.1126/science.292.5520.1261. PMID 11360966.
- ^ "Joint Science Academies' Statement" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2013-09-09. Retrieved 2006-08-30.
- ^ "Joint statement by the Network of African Science Academies (NASAC) to the G8 on sustainability, energy efficiency and climate change". Network of African Science Academies. 2007. Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 June 2017. Retrieved 28 August 2012.
- ^ "INQUA Statement On Climate Change" (PDF).
- ^ Cook, John; Nuccitelli, Dana; Green, Sarah A.; Richardson, Mark; Winkler, Bärbel; Painting, Rob; Way, Robert; Jacobs, Peter; Skuce, Andrew (15 May 2013). "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature". Environ. Res. Lett. 8 (2). IOP Publishing Ltd.: 024024. Bibcode:2013ERL.....8b4024C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024.
- ^ "Scientific and Public Perspectives on Climate Change / Scientists' vs. Public Understanding of Human-Caused Global Warming". climatecommunication.yale.edu. Yale University. 29 May 2013. Archived from the original on 17 April 2019.
- ^ Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; Verheggen, Bart; Maibach, Ed W.; Carlton, J. Stuart; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Skuce, Andrew G.; Green, Sarah A. (2016), "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming", Environmental Research Letters, 11 (44): 048002, Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C, doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002048002
- ^ "The NOAA Annual Greenhouse Gas Index (AGGI)". NOAA.gov. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). Spring 2023. Archived from the original on 24 May 2023.
- ^ "List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations That Hold the Position That Climate Change Has Been Caused by Human Action". Archived from the original on 7 August 2017. Retrieved 7 August 2017.
- ^ "Climate Science Special Report: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume I – Chapter 3: Detection and Attribution of Climate Change". science2017.globalchange.gov. U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP): 1–470. 2017. Archived from the original on 23 September 2019. Adapted directly from Fig. 3.3.
- ^ Wuebbles, D.J.; Fahey, D.W.; Hibbard, K.A.; Deangelo, B.; Doherty, S.; Hayhoe, K.; Horton, R.; Kossin, J.P.; Taylor, P.C.; Waple, A.M.; Yohe, C.P. (23 November 2018). "Climate Science Special Report / Fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA4), Volume I /Executive Summary / Highlights of the Findings of the U.S. Global Change Research Program Climate Science Special Report". globalchange.gov. U.S. Global Change Research Program: 1–470. doi:10.7930/J0DJ5CTG. Archived from the original on 14 June 2019.
- ^ Roper, Willem (25 January 2021). "Global Warming Chart – Here's How Temperatures Have Risen Since 1950". World Economic Forum. Retrieved 5 November 2023.
- ^ Slade, David H. (1989). "A survey of informed opinion regarding the nature and reality of a 'global greenhouse warming'". Climatic Change. 16: 1–4. doi:10.1007/BF00137342. S2CID 153884762.
- ^ GECR climate survey shows strong agreement on action, less so on warming (Report). Vol. 2. Global Environmental Change Report. 1990. pp. 1–3.
- ^ "World warming at record 0.2 C per decade, scientists warn". Phys.org. Retrieved 23 November 2023.
- ^ Jump up to:a b c Bray, Dennis; Storch, Hans von. "Climate Scientists' Perceptions of Climate Change Science" (PDF). GKSS Report 11/2007.
- ^ "Climate scientists' views on climate change: a survey". Nature Climate Change. 8 August 2007. Archived from the original on 13 January 2012.
- ^ Naomi Oreskes (3 December 2004). "Beyond the Ivory Tower: The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change" (PDF). Science. 306 (5702): 1686. doi:10.1126/science.1103618. PMID 15576594. S2CID 153792099.
- ^ Lichter, S. Robert (24 April 2008). "Climate Scientists Agree on Warming, Disagree on Dangers, and Don't Trust the Media's Coverage of Climate Change". Statistical Assessment Service, George Mason University. Archived from the original on 11 January 2010. Retrieved 20 January 2010.
- ^ ""Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change"". Journalist's Resource.org.
- ^ Stephen J. Farnsworth; S. Robert Lichter (27 October 2011). "The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change". International Journal of Public Opinion Research. Archived from the original on 11 March 2013. Retrieved 2 December 2011.
- ^ Lavelle, Marianne (23 April 2008). "Survey Tracks Scientists' Growing Climate Concern". U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved 20 January 2010.
- ^ Bray, Dennis; von Storch, Hans (2010). "A Survey of the Perspectives of Climate Scientists Concerning Climate Science and Climate Change" (PDF).
- ^ Bray, Dennis (August 2010). "The scientific consensus of climate change revisited" (PDF). Environmental Science & Policy. 13 (5): 340–350. doi:10.1016/j.envsci.2010.04.001., copy online at [1]
- ^ Bray, D.; von Storch H. (2009). "Prediction' or 'Projection; The nomenclature of climate science" (PDF). Science Communication. 30 (4): 534–543. doi:10.1177/1075547009333698. S2CID 145338218.
- ^ "Ice sheet melt on track with 'worst-case climate scenario'". www.esa.int. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
- ^ Slater, Thomas; Hogg, Anna E.; Mottram, Ruth (31 August 2020). "Ice-sheet losses track high-end sea-level rise projections". Nature Climate Change. 10 (10): 879–881. Bibcode:2020NatCC..10..879S. doi:10.1038/s41558-020-0893-y. ISSN 1758-6798. S2CID 221381924. Archived from the original on 2 September 2020. Retrieved 8 September 2020.
- ^ Grinsted, Aslak; Christensen, Jens Hesselbjerg (2021-02-02). "The transient sensitivity of sea level rise". Ocean Science. 17 (1): 181–186. Bibcode:2021OcSci..17..181G. doi:10.5194/os-17-181-2021. ISSN 1812-0784. S2CID 234353584.
- ^ Fox-Kemper, B.; Hewitt, H.T.; Xiao, C.; Aðalgeirsdóttir, G.; Drijfhout, S.S.; Edwards, T.L.; Golledge, N.R.; Hemer, M.; Kopp, R.E.; Krinner, G.; Mix, A. (2021). Masson-Delmotte, V.; Zhai, P.; Pirani, A.; Connors, S.L.; Péan, C.; Berger, S.; Caud, N.; Chen, Y.; Goldfarb, L. (eds.). "Chapter 9: Ocean, Cryosphere and Sea Level Change" (PDF). Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, US: 1302.
- ^ Doran, Peter T.; Zimmerman, Maggie Kendall (20 January 2009). "Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change". EOS. 90 (3): 22–23. Bibcode:2009EOSTr..90...22D. doi:10.1029/2009EO030002. S2CID 128398335.
- ^ William R. L. Anderegg; James W. Prall; Jacob Harold & Stephen H. Schneider (April 9, 2010). "Expert credibility in climate change". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 107 (27): 12107–12109. Bibcode:2010PNAS..10712107A. doi:10.1073/pnas.1003187107. PMC 2901439. PMID 20566872.
- ^ Scientists 'Convinced' of Climate Consensus More Prominent Than Opponents, Says Paper by Eli Kintisch, "Science Insider", Science, 21 June 2010
- ^ ""Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change" at Journalist's Resource.org".
- ^ Jump up to:a b Stephen J. Farnsworth; S. Robert Lichter (27 October 2011). "The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change". International Journal of Public Opinion Research. 24: 93–103. doi:10.1093/ijpor/edr033. Retrieved 2 December 2011. Paywalled; full test online here, retrieved 30 November 2014. From Table I, "Q: In your opinion, is human-induced greenhouse warming now occurring?" Yes, 84%. No, 5%. Don't Know, 12%
- ^ Powell, James Lawrence (15 November 2012), "The State of Climate Science: A Thorough Review of the Scientific Literature on Global Warming", Science Progress, retrieved 21 September 2016
- ^ Powell, James Lawrence (2011). The Inquisition of Climate Science. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-15718-6.
- ^ Plait, P. (11 December 2012). "Why Climate Change Denial Is Just Hot Air". Slate. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
- ^ Sheppard, Kate (1 December 2012). "CHART: Only 0.17 Percent of Peer-Reviewed Papers Question Global Warming". Mother Jones. Retrieved 12 February 2014.
- ^ Plait, P. (14 January 2014). "The Very, Very Thin Wedge of Denial". Slate. Retrieved 12 June 2014.
- ^ Gertz, Emily (10 January 2014). "Infographic: Scientists Who Doubt Human-Caused Climate Change". Popular Science. Retrieved 12 February 2014.
- ^ The study in question was: Avakyan, S. V. (2013). "The role of solar activity in global warming". Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 83 (3): 275–285. Bibcode:2013HRuAS..83..275A. doi:10.1134/S1019331613030015. S2CID 154047107.
- ^ Bray, Dennis; von Storch, Hans (2014). "A survey of the perceptions of climate scientists 2013" (PDF).
- ^ Jump up to:a b c Cook, John; Dana Nuccitelli; Sarah A Green; Mark Richardson; Bärbel Winkler; Rob Painting; Robert Way; Peter Jacobs; Andrew Skuce (May 2013). "Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature". Environmental Research Letters. 8 (2): 024024. Bibcode:2013ERL.....8b4024C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024.
- ^ Oreskes 2007, p. 72: "[Scientists] generally focus their discussions on questions that are still disputed or unanswered rather than on matters about which everyone agrees"
- ^ Verheggen, Bart; Strengers, Bart; Cook, John; van Dorland, Rob; Vringer, Kees; Peters, Jeroen; Visser, Hans; Meyer, Leo (19 August 2014). "Scientists' Views about Attribution of Global Warming". Environmental Science & Technology. 48 (16): 8963–8971. Bibcode:2014EnST...48.8963V. doi:10.1021/es501998e. PMID 25051508.
- ^ Verheggen, Bart; Strengers, Bart; Vringer, Kees; Cook, John; Dorland, Rob van; Peters, Jeroen; Visser, Hans; Meyer, Leo (2 December 2014). "Reply to Comment on "Scientists' Views about Attribution of Global Warming"". Environmental Science & Technology. 48 (23): 14059–14060. Bibcode:2014EnST...4814059V. doi:10.1021/es505183e. ISSN 0013-936X. PMID 25405594.
- ^ Jump up to:a b Powell, James Lawrence (24 May 2017). "The Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming Matters". Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society. 36 (3): 157–163. doi:10.1177/0270467617707079. S2CID 148618842.
- ^ Benestad, Rasmus E.; Nuccitelli, Dana; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Hayhoe, Katharine; Hygen, Hans Olav; van Dorland, Rob; Cook, John (November 2016). "Learning from mistakes in climate research". Theoretical and Applied Climatology. 126 (3–4): 699–703. Bibcode:2016ThApC.126..699B. doi:10.1007/s00704-015-1597-5. ISSN 0177-798X.
- ^ Tol, Richard S J (1 April 2016). "Comment on 'Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature'". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4). IOP Publishing: 048001. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8001T. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048001. ISSN 1748-9326.
- ^ Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; Verheggen, Bart; Maibach, Ed W.; Carlton, J. Stuart; Lewandowsky, Stephan; Skuce, Andrew G.; Green, Sarah A.; Nuccitelli, Dana (April 2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002. ISSN 1748-9326.
- ^ Bray, Dennis; von Storch, Hans (2016). "The Bray and von Storch 5th International Survey of Climate Scientists 2015/2016". doi:10.13140/RG.2.2.11802.85443.
- ^ Cook, John; Oreskes, Naomi; Doran, Peter T.; Anderegg, William R. L.; et al. (2016). "Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming". Environmental Research Letters. 11 (4): 048002. Bibcode:2016ERL....11d8002C. doi:10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002.
- ^ Jump up to:a b Carrington, Damian (8 May 2024). "World's top climate scientists expect global heating to blast past 1.5C target". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 9 May 2024. Replies were received from 380 of 843 scientists believed to have been contacted.
- ^ Ramanujan, Krishna. "More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change". Cornell Chronicle. Environmental Research Letters. Retrieved 20 October 2021.
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #48
Tell you what. You allowed Wikipedia to scare you half to death. But this has not happened to me. I listened to actual competent climate scientists and not Wikipedia.
I am not scared half to death. Wikipedia has simply informed us that the vast majority of climate scientists believe that the Earth is warming and that the primary cause is human CO2 emissions.
What has not happened to you? Reading? Learning? For fuck's sake Robert, get a goddamned education.
According to better than 95% (99% is what the article actually states) of the world's climate scientists, the fellow you're listening to IS NOT A COMPETENT CLIMATE SCIENTIST.
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #50
It is not one fellow. It is a group of Climate scientists. They dispute your 95 percent figure or worse the 99 percent figure. It is fiction.
Funny, that exactly what the thousands and thousands of scientists on my side of this argument say about what your handful of scientists are saying. When those studies say that 99% accept AGW, the 1% that do not are the "group of Climate scientists" to which you've been listening. And you don't need to capitalize "Climate".
There are mountains of evidence supporting the mainstream conclusion. Are you suggesting it is a fiction? Are the temperatures fiction? How about the multiple proxy reconstructions, are they fictions? Are the CO2 numbers a fiction? Is the science that says what that CO2 does with IR radiation a fiction? Are sea levels a fiction? Is the disappearing ice a fiction? Are the changing seasonal timings a fiction? Are the changes in the numbers of record highs and record lows a fiction? How about the satellites that are directly measuring incoming solar and outgoing infrared? Are those data fiction?
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #52
The temperatures are not fiction. They are insignificant. We are not in danger. We need not take action. If you design a pair of pliers, and because it is a tool, would you agree it is a screwdriver. We have beat this horse to death. Can we bury it?
Climate misinformation by source: Richard Lindzen
Examines the science and arguments of global warming skepticism. Common objections like 'global warming is caused by the sun', 'temperature has changed naturally in the past' or 'other planets are warming too' are examined to see what the science really says.
skepticalscience.com
You mean this Einstein?
Thousands of climate scientists, who know this subject far, far better than you and I, say they are extremely significant.
Thousands and thousands of climate scientists, who know this subject far, far better than you and I, say we are.
Thousands and thousands of climate scientists, who know this subject far, far better than you and I, say we do.
Why are you beating a horse to death and are you using the pliers or the screwdriver? I have no fucking idea what you're trying to say here Robert.
Last edited:
Einstein's work was revolutionary but after Special Relativity, no one questioned the quality of his work. Lindzen's "work" in global warming and climate science has been questioned from the get go through to this very day. Calling him an Einstein is like calling Donald Trump a great leader. The only sensible reaction is a gut-busting guffaw.
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #56
All climates work in global warming and climate science has been questioned from the intrusion by politicians. I have hopes very intelligent climatologists like Professor Lindzen are the keys to ending this crazy scare tactic by the left.
All this BS over a couple of degrees over 150 years is nuts.
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #57
Yes. And he is a skeptic.Climate misinformation by source: Richard Lindzen
Examines the science and arguments of global warming skepticism. Common objections like 'global warming is caused by the sun', 'temperature has changed naturally in the past' or 'other planets are warming too' are examined to see what the science really says.skepticalscience.com
You mean this Einstein?
I'm uncertain what you mean there. The IPCC's first and second Assessment Reports had significant influence by the governments of the sponsor nations who generally urged them to 'tone it down'. This produced loud complaints from the science community which succeeded in getting public support. The influence that political actors have these days on the products of the IPCC is very close to nil. But, since it was formed and is funded by a political association of governments to produce reports for those governments and the public at large, it was never possible for the IPCC to experience zero political pressure. However, if you wanted to avoid partisan political pressure, you'd couldn't find any venue as effectively neutral in international affairs as the UN.
Jesus, Robert, you must be their favorite mark.
Does your characterization (as "BS") come from your personal experience as to the magnitude of a typical global temperature change over a century and a half? Do you have any idea what actually IS a typical change over the course of a century? I bet Dr Google will know. Their AI says:
AI Overview
Find information in faster & easier ways with AI Overviews in Google Search - Google Search Help
The average global temperature has increased by about 1.7°F (1°C) since 1880, which is about ten times faster than the average rate of warming during the recovery from [the ten] ice ages over the past million years. This warming trend is unprecedented in the 2,000-year record and has accelerated in recent decades. In 2023, Earth was about 2.45°F (1.36°C) warmer than the preindustrial average between 1850 and 1900.
Emphasis was mine.
The average rate of warming towards interglacial periods, prior to the onset of AGW was 0.127C degrees/century. To achieve the warming we've accomplished in the last 150 years, we'd have to start back when Arthur (yeah, that Arthur) was attacking the Saxons, Justinian died after 38 years ruling the Byzantine Empire and Pope Gregory was working on his new calendar.
Dagosa
Gold Member
- Oct 22, 2012
- 22,594
- 6,158
- 198
Are you impressed because he has “ doctor” in front of his name ?
- Sep 9, 2022
- 24,299
- 11,805
- 1,138
- Thread starter
- #60
Nobody will stop such a frightened man when he focuses only on disaster.
Similar threads
- Locked
New Topics
-
What seems to be the problem with these pro Pali supporters?- Started by Roudy
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
Breaking: Terrible GDP report just dropped… halfway to recession- Started by citygator
- Replies: 11
-
Zone1 Modern-day latency problems + cyber-war threats + loyalty questions = internet services not working?- Started by peacefan
- Replies: 0
Latest Discussions
-
-
Measles now up to 900 cases in 10 states. Why hasnt trump stopped it ?- Latest: TheGreatSatan
-
New Amendment Could Give Trump A Path To A Third Term In The White House
- Latest: Billiejeens
