More than 99.9% of peer reviewed studies show that humans are the primary cause of global warming

[Robert W]

More than 99.9% of studies agree: Humans caused climate change | Cornell Chronicle

More than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is mainly caused by humans, according to a new survey of 88,125 climate-related studies.

news.cornell.edu

AND

Radware Bot Manager Captcha

iopscience.iop.org

Abstract​

While controls over the Earth's climate system have undergone rigorous hypothesis-testing since the 1800s, questions over the scientific consensus of the role of human activities in modern climate change continue to arise in public settings. We update previous efforts to quantify the scientific consensus on climate change by searching the recent literature for papers sceptical of anthropogenic-caused global warming. From a dataset of 88125 climate-related papers published since 2012, when this question was last addressed comprehensively, we examine a randomized subset of 3000 such publications. We also use a second sample-weighted approach that was specifically biased with keywords to help identify any sceptical peer-reviewed papers in the whole dataset. We identify four sceptical papers out of the sub-set of 3000, as evidenced by abstracts that were rated as implicitly or explicitly sceptical of human-caused global warming. In our sample utilizing pre-identified sceptical keywords we found 28 papers that were implicitly or explicitly sceptical. We conclude with high statistical confidence that the scientific consensus on human-caused contemporary climate change—expressed as a proportion of the total publications—exceeds 99% in the peer reviewed scientific literature.

---

The consensus means something. For all practical purposes, there is no longer ANY scientific debate on the primary cause of global warming.

How dare those Chinese do this.

 

[jc456]

No, no he did not.

Why Fido you think that he did.

Explain

The fk he didn’t, you asked when the co2 was higher and cold. He gave you that information. What didn’t you understand

 

[otto105]

The fk he didn’t, you asked when the co2 was higher and cold. He gave you that information. What didn’t you understand

Just post pass

 

[jc456]

Just post pass

You don’t like being called out as an asshole huh?

 

[Concerned American]

Pal review.....100% politics.

Tell the "peers" what they want to hear, and you get into the Goebbels Warming Country Club.

From Cornell, the university that wants to wipe Israel from the face of the earth. Yeah, no credibility from that shithole.

 

[otto105]

You don’t like being called out as an asshole huh?

No, I love being a truth asshole.

You failed to provide a truth.

 

[ding]

No, I love being a truth asshole.

You failed to provide a truth.

If you were interested in the truth all of your beliefs would not follow along party line.

 

[Crick]

When was CO2 over 442ppm again?

About 4 million years ago

 

[CrusaderFrank]

An ice age is a climate change. The article is not saying that humans caused all climate change. It is saying that there is an overwhelming consensus among published climate scientists that humans are primarily responsible for the warming observed since the Industrial Revolution.

Science is not done by consensus, that’s how a cult operates

We’re having vigorous debates about gravity, but 99.9% of paid stooges agree about manmade global climate warming change? Ridiculous!

 

[ding]

About 4 million years ago

View attachment 852937

Actually, Azolla sucked ~2500 ppm of CO2 from the atmosphere over an ~800,000 year period roughly 50 million years ago. And if you want to see when glaciation occurred at each pole the oxygen isotope curve is the best way to see that. As prior to the industrial revolution CO2 was a function of temperature.

 

[Robert W]

Science is not done by consensus, that’s how a cult operates

We’re having vigorous debates about gravity, but 99.9% of paid stooges agree about manmade global climate warming change? Ridiculous!

Here is the thing. By blaming humans, they trigger a rush to rule humans and of course by Democrats in the USA. Frankly I doubt much of the world falls for this ruse to control humans.

 

[Crick]

Here is the thing. By blaming humans, they trigger a rush to rule humans and of course by Democrats in the USA. Frankly I doubt much of the world falls for this ruse to control humans.

I would think that the victimhood for which the lot of you live and breathe would begin to engender a little self-examination, a bit of wondering whether or not you're really taking the high road here. And accusing Democrats of seeking excess power when Donald Trump, with majority support from the Republican Party, is promising to throw out the Constitution, jail his political opponents and dedicate his next term to the enactment of retribution is ignorant delusion.

That "rush to rule" is simply the drive to form stable, enduring societies. Humans are ruled by laws and the social structure that makes those laws work. The reason your conclusions are so flawed is that your premises are false to the bone. You just posted an extensive text by Judith Curry, whom you apparently respect as an expert on the climate, yet her views do not seem to have shaken your belief that there is no global warming, that the whole thing is a hoax by evil Democrats.

You need to look at your own thought processes; at whom YOU are blaming for this issue and whether or not there is actually ANY objective evidence to support the views you've chosen to adopt.

 

[justoffal]

View attachment 852782

A blast from the past.

Are you suggesting that the sun's increase in luminosity is a factor in global warming but that it might be offset by the mass the sun is losing? Well, the graphic indicates that the sun's luminosity will increase from roughly 0.75X to 2.0X over a period of 10 billion years. That's approximately 2.67 millionths of one percent increase per CENTURY. Here is another source that says solar luminosity is increasing about 10% every billion years (or 1 millionth of 1 percent per century)

The sun won’t die for 5 billion years, so why do humans have only 1 billion years left on Earth?

In a few billion years, the sun will become a red giant so large that it will engulf our planet. But the Earth will become uninhabitable much sooner than that. After about a billion years the sun will…

theconversation.com

So the sun's increasing luminosity is absolutely microscopic compared to the rate at which the Earth's temperature is rising. It might be interesting to see how it compares to the effect of saving the whales... ; - )

So the sun's increasing luminosity is absolutely microscopic compared to the rate at which the Earth's temperature is rising. It might be interesting to see how it compares to the effect of saving the whales... ; - )

It is an increase and I posit to you that we are as of yet unfamiliar with the total effect of the increase. All predictions point to end of life on earth in a billion years due to solar radiation.
Sure the earth will go on for another 4 billion after that....but it will resemble Venus by then.
How do we get there? GRADUALLY.

 

[Crick]

So the sun's increasing luminosity is absolutely microscopic compared to the rate at which the Earth's temperature is rising. It might be interesting to see how it compares to the effect of saving the whales... ; - )

It is an increase and I posit to you that we are as of yet unfamiliar with the total effect of the increase. All predictions point to end of life on earth in a billion years due to solar radiation.
Sure the earth will go on for another 4 billion after that....but it will resemble Venus by then.
How do we get there? GRADUALLY.

We DO know that the current rate at which the sun's luminosity is increasing, as it moves through what is known as the Main Sequence, during which it produces energy by fusing hydrogen into helium, is far too minute to be responsible for the last century's global warming. The long term future of the Sun follows what scientists know regarding stellar evolution, something they have had spent quite a few man-hours observing, what with the billions and billions of examples overhead. There is also some very interesting physics going on that is covered on a large number of websites. The Sun's future is projected to follow this line. Note the changes in the time scale at the bottom.

The End Of The Sun

 

[justoffal]

The planet's "normal" climate - for the past 3 million years - are long periods of frigid temperatures followed by brief intervals of warmth like today.

Orbital Precession perhaps?

 

[justoffal]

We DO know that the current rate at which the sun's luminosity is increasing, as it moves through what is known as the Main Sequence, during which it produces energy by fusing hydrogen into helium, is far too minute to be responsible for the last century's global warming. The long term future of the Sun follows what scientists know regarding stellar evolution, something they have had spent quite a few man-hours observing, what with the billions and billions of examples overhead. There is also some very interesting physics going on that is covered on a large number of websites. The Sun's future is projected to follow this line. Note the changes in the time scale at the bottom.

View attachment 853038

The End Of The Sun

So yes we're missing some information just like we are with the dark energy enigma. I'm merely pointing to the fact that immediately to our side in the galaxy we have a heat source that is indeed gradually increasing. Given the fact that it's basically where 99% of our energy comes from subtracting a small amount for whatever heat the Earth generates from within.... I believe our answers lie in that direction.

 

[Crick]

So yes we're missing some information just like we are with the dark energy enigma. I'm merely pointing to the fact that immediately to our side in the galaxy we have a heat source that is indeed gradually increasing. Given the fact that it's basically where 99% of our energy comes from subtracting a small amount for whatever heat the Earth generates from within.... I believe our answers lie in that direction.

What answers? The cause for global warming? That answer is known. It is caused by the greenhouse effect acting on greenhouse gases, primarily CO2 emitted by humans burning fossil fuels.

 

[justoffal]

What answers? The cause for global warming? That answer is known. It is caused by the greenhouse effect acting on greenhouse gases, primarily CO2 emitted by humans burning fossil fuels.

The answer is assumed

 

[Polishprince]

In 1492, 99% of peer reviewed studies proved beyond a doubt the earth was flat, but the Italians disagreed and sent Chris Columbus to prove them wrong and discover a new world.

 

[Crick]

The answer is assumed

It is not. It is the result of an enormous amount of research, study and analysis by thousands and thousands of very intelligent, very well-educated people from all over the world and across decades of time.