Aug 30 2007

No Consensus On Global Warming

Published by at 9:09 am under All General Discussions,Global Warming

In the mind of Al Gore and is science challenged minions the issue of man made global warming is universally settled. Interestingly the only thing that is settled is the fact the globe is warming – a bit. But the source of this and the impact is not settled. The scientific community is completely split on this, with the minority supporting man made global warming:

In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the “consensus view,” defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes’ work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated.

Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising.

Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”

Now we know – the support for the idea the warming of the Earth is man made has been dropping off as more and more is known about the phenomena.

The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the “primary” cause of warming, but it doesn’t require any belief or support for “catastrophic” global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

These changing viewpoints represent the advances in climate science over the past decade. While today we are even more certain the earth is warming, we are less certain about the root causes. More importantly, research has shown us that — whatever the cause may be — the amount of warming is unlikely to cause any great calamity for mankind or the planet itself.

Wake up Al and pay attention. Your position is LOSING ground.

5 responses so far

5 Responses to “No Consensus On Global Warming”

  1. No consensus on Global Warming…

    Only the people wanting to use it as an excuse to make us do or not do something pretend there is a consensus…

  2. owl says:

    There is a reason for their madness. When Bush came into office, it was just about excepted fact that the UN was the Be All, Know ALL of our universe. I heard Carl Levin and Dianne Feinstein give them the okay as America’s Decider.

    Global Warming=Global Taxes. Money/Power.

    I am just glad there are people like you who are smart enough to rip holes in this hoax.

  3. jasonhayes says:

    The notion that there is anything resembling a consensus on climate change is laughable.

    A few quick points:
    - most serious climate scientists don’t want anything to do with the politics that surround this issue. Getting involved would be a death knell for their work.
    - The SPMs is a consensus of government bureaucrats, not the scientists who worked on the IPCCs Working Group paper
    - Most of the scientists who worked on the the working group paper were only involved in small portions of the whole report. They couldn’t have given their assent to the entire thing because they wouldn’t have know what was in the complete report until after it was finished.
    - the national science academy statements have been widely questioned. For example, the Yury Izrael (with the Russian Academy of Sciences) said the Russian’s signature on the 2005 joint statement was “a misunderstanding.” The former President of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences Bruce Albert said “we definitely did not approve the (London) Royal Society press release.” Others have raised similar questions about the Canadian signature.

    There is no “consensus,” and even if there was, consensus does not make science.

    AJ is absolutely correct on this one.

  4. BarbaraS says:

    Global warming is a democrat ploy. They have nothing else. This is just a way to get our money and bring down our economy. I guarantee that global warming will go away once a democrat gets into the presidency. Up to that point it is all rhetoric to ruin the economy and bring down Bush. That is their number one obsjective. All these bigwigs who call on the rest of us to give up this and that are giving up nothing. It’s the “little people ” who must sacrifice, folks.