The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change

Gwad

https://skepticalscience.com/consensus-boston-u.html

When do 97% of people agree on anything, even ice cream? In scientific circles, consensus is a rare trophy, held to famously exacting standards. When a scientific consensus is finally reached — e.g., the Earth orbits the sun; water freezes at 32°F, 0°C; blood is red — a new fact joins the foundations of human discovery.

Under normal circumstances, a 97% consensus of the world’s leading scientists on anything would establish it as fact and compel action if needed. But our circumstances are not normal. Only 12% of Americans realize that that the scientific consensus on climate change is greater than 90%. Even among people who are Alarmed or Concerned about climate change, the consensus is somewhat unknown. Of the Alarmed, 84% understand the scientific consensus on climate change (16% do not); and 73% of the Concerned (27%).

RaceBannon

Does not exist like you want to believe

Gwad

Ok dude that is why you're looking to a lawyer that claims himself a scientists to support your position.

Sledog

Gwad said:

Ok dude that is why you're looking to a lawyer that claims himself a scientists to support your position.

Why would you believe people that were caught cooking the books? No global warming means no pay.

RaceBannon

Gwad said:

Ok dude that is why you're looking to a lawyer that claims himself a scientists to support your position.

I'm not

I'm a logician and I believe in real science

Not half truths and phony stats

The climate changes. We all know that. Its your religion that we dont agree with and that has no consensus

Gwad

Ya why would you believe scientists or a huge petroleum company that came to the same conclusions decades before the issue ever became charged by propaganda.

greenblood

Sweet, good work!!! Could you do us all a favor and send this report to some Chinese forums? That would be great since that country alone contributes 30% of the total global greenhouse gases

Gwad

RaceBannon said:

Gwad said:

Ok dude that is why you're looking to a lawyer that claims himself a scientists to support your position.

I'm not

I'm a logician and I believe in real science

Not half truths and phony stats

The climate changes. We all know that. Its your religion that we dont agree with and that has no consensus

Ya humans are just exempt from having their activities add any weight to the outcome of your logical progressions. Seems like you forget about the principles of causality in your logical facade.

PurpleThrobber

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

UW_Doog_Bot

Kind of hilarious the links to studies don't work on an article crying out about communication of consensus. To Google I go I guess.

greenblood

PurpleThrobber said:

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

Exactly

These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job.

Gwad

greenblood said:

PurpleThrobber said:

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

Exactly

These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job.

Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.

WestlinnDuck

The 97% is a lie. When you need to lie to make your point maybe you don't have a point. US CO2 production down Germany and the chicoms up. And yet we are the problem?

UW_Doog_Bot

Gwad said:

greenblood said:

PurpleThrobber said:

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

Exactly

These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job.

Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.

This might amaze you but most big energy companies are super diversified at this point. Further, they have more capital than any of the small "green energy" outfits. If there's money to be had in switching over, rest assured, they would be doing so. As much as it fits your narrative to have some sort of "cabal" secretly controlling the energy market it's a huge uphill battle to manage to manipulate such a large, international, and diverse market.

Gwad

WestlinnDuck said:

The 97% is a lie. When you need to lie to make your point maybe you don't have a point. US CO2 production down Germany and the chicoms up. And yet we are the problem?

We??? Dude are you taking a scientific consensus personally? JFC

greenblood

Gwad said:

greenblood said:

PurpleThrobber said:

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

Exactly

These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job.

Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.

Can you point me to a denying scientist that's getting paid by these industries?

Gwad

greenblood said:

Gwad said:

greenblood said:

PurpleThrobber said:

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

Exactly

These scientist not only rely on funding for research, but also for wages as well. The climate change hysteria has to continue or a lot of these scientist are out of a job.

Yes the same parameters don't apply to the industries that are negatively impacted by changing how we do things now.

Can you point me to a denying scientist that's getting paid by these industries?

How can you behold the truth if you cannot seek for yourself?

HoustonHusky

The author of that drivel and you can't even read. Its claim is "97% of published papers agree". Which means literally nothing, especially since they are published in journals focusing on that. Add to that most of the papers aren't even related to global warming but because they somehow have a identifying term and don't explicitly say they think there is a bunch of bad science in it then they are grouped into the 97%.

https://friendsofscience.org/assets/documents/97_Consensus_Myth.pdf

Keep lying...

RoadTrip

PurpleThrobber said:

Ax yourself:

Your very existence is dependent on grant-funding and corporate or gubmint support to put food on the table. You have no appreciable job skills or other means of making money than 'research'. Take any topic - climate, agriculture, drug research....who cares? Same concept.

It is not logical to assume benevolence and truthiness uber alles. You gots to eat. Are you going to bite the hand that feeds you? Or your family? Remember - you can't do shit other than sit in a lab or interpret data. You can't swing a hammer, you can't close a deal, you can't produce a product.....

That 3% that aren't in your 97% consensus....maybe THAT'S the group that says "Fuck all" and isn't beholden to the Money Grab and are pure scientists for the science of it.

But that's not in the interest of the Money Grabbers....so you're considered a heretic.

And the crazy part is - the Money Grabbers sit on both the left and the right. They just have a comfort in either direction on who they want to whore out their 'science'.

It gets really hot. It gets really cold. Same as it ever was.

Why try at all with this dipshit?

Gwad

Friends of Science (FoS) is a non-profit advocacy organization based in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. The organization rejects the established scientific conclusion that humans are largely responsible for the currently observed global warming. Rather, they propose that "the Sun is the main direct and indirect driver of climate change," not human activity. They argued against the Kyoto Protocol.[1] The society was founded in 2002 and launched its website in October of that year.[2][3] They are largely funded by the fossil fuel industry.[4][5]

Bendintheriver

Gwad said:

WestlinnDuck said:

The 97% is a lie. When you need to lie to make your point maybe you don't have a point. US CO2 production down Germany and the chicoms up. And yet we are the problem?

We??? Dude are you taking a scientific consensus personally? JFC

There is no consensus. The 97% lie you keep blathering about has been debunked over and over. Even the two nitwits who started and then propagated 97% lie had to come clean. So why do you keep on lying?

Those experts that disagreed with the globalists that it was all man made were shouted down, some lost their jobs. You had lib "scientists" even suggesting that those that disagree with MMGW should be thrown in jail FFS. Many on the left were condemning those that refused to confirm faulty data and research that was used to attempt to globalize our country while at the same time fraudulently wasting (while getting rich) billions in tax payer dollars on grant research. You and yours effectively made the process and ideal of science itself ineffectual, worthless. Science is the constant search, you libs stopped that search thus rendering all liberal conclusions suspect.