Know-it-all Liberal Pinheads

[HelenaHandbag]

The scientists in this bogus 97% number self-selected to answer a questionnaire.

I'm certain that [MENTION=23239]westwall[/MENTION] or [MENTION=30473]flacaltenn[/MENTION] can fill us in on the details. They're pretty good like that.

I am seeing more papers and physics.com reports of the stall. Maybe there is something wrong.

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

OK.

Now, what about this fake 97% number?

I heard it was from a bunch of scientists who self-selected to answer a questionnaire, and that none of those who didn't answer it were considered in the total percentage.

Do you have some more info to flesh that out?

 

[ScienceRocks]

I am seeing more papers and physics.com reports of the stall. Maybe there is something wrong.

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

Funny how the "stall" has produced 9 of the top 10 warmest years! The warming has slowed down but not stopped, but to deniers a slower warming is global cooling!

You can get this the avg over isn't increasing but avged at a higher level(avg means temperature) then the decade before.

Notice how it is just as likely since 1998 to see a .58c as a .65? This is what I mean.

 

[Abraham3]

Matthew, Westwall, EdtheCynic,

Can anyone explain how AGW could have ended when the satellite ToA data show it is still increasing?

 

[Old Rocks]

Look at this graph. Prior to 1998, the ups and downs were like mountains and valleys. Then after 1998, pretty much a plateu, with one valley and one mountain. And the centered average is higher for most of that period than all but the very highest months prior to 1998.

http://www.drroyspencer.com/2014/02/uah-global-temperature-update-for-january-2014-0-29-deg-c/

 

[Old Rocks]

I am seeing more papers and physics.com reports of the stall. Maybe there is something wrong.

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

OK.

Now, what about this fake 97% number?

I heard it was from a bunch of scientists who self-selected to answer a questionnaire, and that none of those who didn't answer it were considered in the total percentage.

Do you have some more info to flesh that out?

You state that 97% is fake? Care to provide a credible link demonstrating that?

In the meantime, all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the world state that AGW is a fact, and a clear and present danger.

Climate Change: Consensus

Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

 

[Old Rocks]

While the harsh winter pounding many areas of North America and Europe seemingly contradicts the fact that global warming continues unabated, a new survey finds consensus among scientists about the reality of climate change and its likely cause.



Scientists Agree Human-induced Global Warming Is Real, Survey Says -- ScienceDaily

A group of 3,146 earth scientists surveyed around the world overwhelmingly agree that in the past 200-plus years, mean global temperatures have been rising, and that human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.
Peter Doran, University of Illinois at Chicago associate professor of earth and environmental sciences, along with former graduate student Maggie Kendall Zimmerman, conducted the survey late last year.
The findings appear January 19 in the publication Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union.

 

[Old Rocks]

Publications of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America.

Expert credibility in climate change

Abstract
Although preliminary estimates from published literature and expert surveys suggest striking agreement among climate scientists on the tenets of anthropogenic climate change (ACC), the American public expresses substantial doubt about both the anthropogenic cause and the level of scientific agreement underpinning ACC. A broad analysis of the climate scientist community itself, the distribution of credibility of dissenting researchers relative to agreeing researchers, and the level of agreement among top climate experts has not been conducted and would inform future ACC discussions. Here, we use an extensive dataset of 1,372 climate researchers and their publication and citation data to show that (i) 97–98% of the climate researchers most actively publishing in the field support the tenets of ACC outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and (ii) the relative climate expertise and scientific prominence of the researchers unconvinced of ACC are substantially below that of the convinced researchers.

 

[HelenaHandbag]

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

OK.

Now, what about this fake 97% number?

I heard it was from a bunch of scientists who self-selected to answer a questionnaire, and that none of those who didn't answer it were considered in the total percentage.

Do you have some more info to flesh that out?

You state that 97% is fake? Care to provide a credible link demonstrating that?

In the meantime, all the Scientific Societies, all the National Academies of Science, and all the major Universities in the world state that AGW is a fact, and a clear and present danger.

Climate Change: Consensus

Ninety-seven percent of climate scientists agree that climate-warming trends over the past century are very likely due to human activities,1and most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position. The following is a partial list of these organizations, along with links to their published statements and a selection of related resources.

The number stems from a 2009 online survey of 10,257 earth scientists, conducted by two researchers at the University of Illinois. The survey results must have deeply disappointed the researchers – in the end, they chose to highlight the views of a subgroup of just 77 scientists, 75 of whom thought humans contributed to climate change. The ratio 75/77 produces the 97% figure that pundits now tout.

Climate scientists scarce in study | National Post

The 97% number is 100% fraudulent.

 

[SwimExpert]

Well, either the Ice Age you deniers predicted in the 1970s is finally happening, or.........
It's Winter in America.

1. We have been in an ice age for more than 2 million years.

3. Overall, the people who claimed back then that the world was about to dive into a glacial period are now part of the group of people who are claiming today that the earth is warming.

Bullshit and more bullshit!

You're a real loon. You're even worse than Abby. Much worse. You deny facts directly and unashamedly. At least Abby tends to rely on [albeit really bad] arguments to end around himself to paint facts in a false light that supports his position. You just throw truth out the window and don't even offer a reason for doing so.

 

[SwimExpert]

Bullshit and more bullshit!

Not really, scientists call this period that we happen to be living in an "interglacial" for a reason.

Yeah, because it is the period in between Ice Ages and therefore not an Ice Age!

You sound like a creationist arguing irreducible complexity disproves evolution. You have no clue what you're talking about. None whatsoever. None.

The Earth is in what is called the Quaternary ice age. This ice age has been going on for roughly 2.5 million years. An ice age is a period of reduced temperatures creating and maintaining permanent ice sheets across the surface of the planet. The current existence of the Antarctic and Greenland ice sheets establishes that the Earth is currently in an ice age.

Ice ages are divided into two basic phases. One is called a glacial period, the other is called an interglacial period. These are alternating periods of time of relatively cooler and warmer temperatures. Currently, the Earth is in an interglacial period within the Quaternary ice age, one that has lasted for the past 10ish to 15ish thousand years.

What many people who profess AGW beliefs either don't know, or have long forgotten, is that one of the number one idea (which is now known to be false) from which the idea of man-made global warming beliefs came to exist was the belief that the earth was due for the next glacial period pretty much any day. This was thought because many scientists at the time believed that glacials and interglacials operated on a fairly regular 10,000 year cycle. Scientists now realize this is not the case, and expect the current interglacial will last another 50,000 years. Oh, and before you embarrass yourself by saying something else ridiculous, that estimate is without any consideration for humans potentially impacting the climate over that time period.

 

[SwimExpert]

Matthew, Westwall, EdtheCynic,

Can anyone explain how AGW could have ended when the satellite ToA data show it is still increasing?

Fallacy. Complex question.

 

[Abraham3]

Hey, it's a complex world out there. Come up from the basement and check it out.

 

[SwimExpert]

It's still fallacy.

 

[flacaltenn]

Cherry picked from the International Academies of Science institutes????

Cherry picked from the IPCC. Might want to catch up to speed, dude when you're quoting your "facts".
You need to start following the money and also, why scietists are jumping your ship.

The scientists in this bogus 97% number self-selected to answer a questionnaire.

I'm certain that [MENTION=23239]westwall[/MENTION] or [MENTION=30473]flacaltenn[/MENTION] can fill us in on the details. They're pretty good like that.

The worst source of this statistic is the most oft quoted. It was a study hatched in bowels of skepticalscience.com by a couple bloggers who decided to review technical papers for endorsements of ManMade GW. Published science papers are a very bad place to look for OPINIONS in the first place. But that didnt stop Cook and Nuticelli from releasing and advertising their 97% number. The large majority of papers > 80% EXPRESSED NO OPINION.
But this didnt stop the zealots from loosely claiming that 97% of ALL climate scientists endorsed MAN MADE GW. In any type of poll, you are welcome to dismiss subjects that dont fill out the survey. But if you respond and HAVE NO OPINION, its blatantly dishonest to place any of those folks in either the Aye or Nay category. Doesnt stop these activist nidgets who run a GW misinformation site with an atom bomb counter on each page running up the number of hiroshima bombs that GW energy is equal to.....

Bottom line is the better science papers dont express opinion. And MOST of the papers scanned for opinion fell into that category.. Besides a carefree political comment in a paper does not even mean that all 4 or 12 scientist authors share that view..

 

[flacaltenn]

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

Funny how the "stall" has produced 9 of the top 10 warmest years! The warming has slowed down but not stopped, but to deniers a slower warming is global cooling!

You can get this the avg over isn't increasing but avged at a higher level(avg means temperature) then the decade before.

Notice how it is just as likely since 1998 to see a .58c as a .65? This is what I mean.

Exactly. The difference between all those recors is not statistically significant given the processing and accuracy of the data. The 20th warmest year MIGHT be far enough down to be a real high confidence different measurement. Its all useless hype ranking GLOBAL or national averages by hundreths of a degree.

 

[westwall]

I am seeing more papers and physics.com reports of the stall. Maybe there is something wrong.

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

Funny how the "stall" has produced 9 of the top 10 warmest years! The warming has slowed down but not stopped, but to deniers a slower warming is global cooling!

Funny how those "records" were obtained by moving weather stations to where there was more concrete and other methods of data manipulation. Funny how the years you think were so warm witnessed only a couple of days over 100 degrees (even WITH that help) as compared to the DOZENS and DOZENS that were recorded in the 1930's.

In other words your facts are crap. As is the rest of your pathetic theory..

 

[Abraham3]

Funny that the survey you consider the worst comes up with essentially the same result as the other five surveys.

The only survey done by the wonderful folks on your side of the argument would have to qualify as the worst. What was their result? 0.3% of active climate scientists believe AGW is a valid theory? Was that it? Do you think that was the best survey of the bunch? Was it the most accurate?

The vast majority of climate scientists accept AGW. To argue against that point is to simply announce you either don't care what the truth might be or that you're too stupid to tell.

So which will it be?

 

[SwimExpert]

Is it even possible to be a climate scientist without accepting AGW as true?

 

[flacaltenn]

Is it even possible to be a climate scientist without accepting AGW as true?

Only if there's a Dont Ask Dont Tell policy in place....

 

[edthecynic]

The stall has now become so obvious that the fraudsters can no longer hide it. Their goose is cooked which is why they are so desperate to get the carbon taxes passed ASAP, soon, in fact I believe their window has already closed, there will be zero chance to get the laws passed so yet another avenue of citizen impoverishment and control will be closed to the politicians interested in that sort of thing.

Funny how the "stall" has produced 9 of the top 10 warmest years! The warming has slowed down but not stopped, but to deniers a slower warming is global cooling!

Funny how those "records" were obtained by moving weather stations to where there was more concrete and other methods of data manipulation. Funny how the years you think were so warm witnessed only a couple of days over 100 degrees (even WITH that help) as compared to the DOZENS and DOZENS that were recorded in the 1930's.

In other words your facts are crap. As is the rest of your pathetic theory..

BULLSHIT!

Funny how you think the US with 2% of the world's mass is the entire globe.

Satellite data confirms the ground data and there is no concrete in the satellites.

BTW, deniers Christy and Spencer at UAH got caught manipulating the satellite data trying to change it from global warming to global cooling by using the opposite sign for calculating diurnal satellite drift. Once their manipulation was corrected their data matched the ground stations exactly. It was based on the UAH manipulated data that deniers claimed all other data was manipulated.