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

[elektra]

Consensus, studies of key words and titles is not a consensus

 

[elektra]

Support your contention.

support your post, by addressing each post I made in response to your failed OP

Crick must ignore much, and does, refusing to answer every legitimate post made in response to crick's opinion.

 

[EMH]

So it isn't always the data then, it is also the algorithms. hmmmmmmm

ALGORithm

Get it completely right....

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I recognize your contribution to

SCIENCE!
​

My peer review of your metadata research and findings constitutes “consensus.”

​

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate, AGW is a fraud

 

[CrusaderFrank]

“Consensus” doesn’t mean diddly dick.

It is not a part of the scientific method.

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate, AGW is a fraud

 

[jc456]

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate, AGW is a fraud

Funny, I peer reviewed it and find it 200% also

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Funny, I peer reviewed it and find it 200% also

We have consensus!!

 

[themirrorthief]

We have consensus!!

meanwhile Joe Bidens chinese pals are throwing up coal fired plants as fast as humanly possible....why do democrats not fear global warming

 

[Cellblock2429]

haahahahahhahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahhaha

link to the actual study, abstracts are propaganda

CONSENSUS, is propaganda, politics, not science

And, it only takes one scientist to prove 99.999999999999999% of all scientists, WRONG

Of course, we must remind cricket that not one scientist was surveyed, asked, or questioned, as to what their opinion of AGW was.

/——-/ “And, it only takes one scientist to prove 99.999999999999999% of all scientists, WRONG”
I’d like to add your comment to my sig line.

 

[Kruska]

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

Sadly only North-Korea, Iran, Joe Biden with Russia & Ukraine - now a bit help from Sudan, are providing and working on a solution towards these ghastly humans - maybe they can start with lefty&libs contributing to CO2 first.

 

[ReinyDays]

I bid 300% ... I'll stake my reputation on it ... God knows I've been trying to be rid of that ...

 

[CrusaderFrank]

haahahahahhahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahhaha

link to the actual study, abstracts are propaganda

CONSENSUS, is propaganda, politics, not science

And, it only takes one scientist to prove 99.999999999999999% of all scientists, WRONG

Of course, we must remind cricket that not one scientist was surveyed, asked, or questioned, as to what their opinion of AGW was.

That's how you know it's not science, but a Cult. Unfortunately a Cult that has the full support of a Fascist media.

 

[Deplorable Yankee]

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

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.

Wait till they get to the "peer reviewed "part

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Pal review.....100% politics.

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

I have peer reviewed this post and find it 100% accurate!

 

[CrusaderFrank]

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

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.

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

Yes, Consensus means you're a Cult and people aren't thinking

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Does the AGWCult consider China public enemy #1, since it's "manmade" they have have the most men and expel twice our CO2?

 

[EMH]

Albert, how did you come up with the theory of Relativity...

Well, I polled all taxpayer funded "scientists" and got a "consensus"

LMFAO!!!

Not quite...

Albert Einstein came up with Relativity and put everything on the table for all to see and check and criticize and refute. That is the practice of science.

Global Warming starts with a bogus "consensus" of conflicted liars and then tosses cards at those who question it and ask to see THE DATA...

 

[Cellblock2429]

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

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.

/——/ The consensus was that the earth was the center of the universe until ONE guy proved it wasn’t. The consensus crowd threw him in jail.

 

[jc456]

/——-/ “And, it only takes one scientist to prove 99.999999999999999% of all scientists, WRONG”
I’d like to add your comment to my sig line.

Physics says they’re wrong. If a hot pan sitting on a heated element can’t make the heating element hotter, and two objects at the same temperature can’t make each other hotter, it doesn’t matter two molecules of co2 in the air or a million they are all at the same temperature and can’t get hotter because of physics.

Therefore, since the pan can’t make the source heat hotter, neither can CO2 in the air make the earth surface hotter. And, since co2 molecules at the same temperature can’t make each other hotter, the atmosphere can’t get hotter!
Physics!

Check Mate

 

[2aguy]

I believe, truly, that the best way to bring people in agreement with your side of any issue is to berate, belittle, and insult them.

View attachment 784366

And take their grant money....don't ever forget that............