When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World(RUH ROH!)

[bripat9643]

Smart people always knew this was a con. Anyone who parrots the "97%" claim only proves that he's a lying douche bag.

When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World - Breitbart

But the “97 percent of scientists believe in global warming” mantra became gospel on May 16, 2013, when President Obama tweeted “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.”

What the president was referring to was a 2013 paper by the University of Queensland’s John Cook. In his research, Cook studied 11,994 papers published between 1991 and 2011 that mentioned the search words “global warming” and “global climate change.”

Guess what Cook actually found? Only 32.6 percent of the papers endorsed the view of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. But of that group, 97 percent said that “recent warming is mostly man-made.”​

 

[rightwinger]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

 

[bripat9643]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Here's a quote from the abstract, douche bag:

We find that 66.4 percent of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6 percent endorsed AGW, 0.7 percent rejected AGW and 0.3 percent were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1 percent endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.​

 

[rightwinger]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Here's a quote from the abstract, douche bag:

We find that 66.4 percent of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6 percent endorsed AGW, 0.7 percent rejected AGW and 0.3 percent were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1 percent endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.​

Why do conservatives struggle so much in interpreting statistics?

A search was made of documents that mention global warming in some way....most did not attempt to draw a conclusion one way or another...just referenced it

Of those that drew a conclusion 97 PERCENT endorsed AGW

Only 0.7 percent rejected it

 

[TheOldSchool]

Last line of the abstract:

Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Smart people always knew this was a con. Anyone who parrots the "97%" claim only proves that he's a lying douche bag.

When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World - Breitbart

But the “97 percent of scientists believe in global warming” mantra became gospel on May 16, 2013, when President Obama tweeted “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.”

What the president was referring to was a 2013 paper by the University of Queensland’s John Cook. In his research, Cook studied 11,994 papers published between 1991 and 2011 that mentioned the search words “global warming” and “global climate change.”

Guess what Cook actually found? Only 32.6 percent of the papers endorsed the view of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. But of that group, 97 percent said that “recent warming is mostly man-made.”​

As I pointed out earlier.....you cram that crap into your empty skull, hilarity will ensue....

 

[bripat9643]

Smart people always knew this was a con. Anyone who parrots the "97%" claim only proves that he's a lying douche bag.

When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World - Breitbart

But the “97 percent of scientists believe in global warming” mantra became gospel on May 16, 2013, when President Obama tweeted “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.”

What the president was referring to was a 2013 paper by the University of Queensland’s John Cook. In his research, Cook studied 11,994 papers published between 1991 and 2011 that mentioned the search words “global warming” and “global climate change.”

Guess what Cook actually found? Only 32.6 percent of the papers endorsed the view of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. But of that group, 97 percent said that “recent warming is mostly man-made.”​

As I pointed out earlier.....you cram that crap into your empty skull, hilarity will ensue....

You have failed to post anything substantive since you joined the forum. All you do is nit-pick at nothing.

 

[Clementine]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

 

[rightwinger]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

 

[IcebergSlim]

Smart people always knew this was a con. Anyone who parrots the "97%" claim only proves that he's a lying douche bag.

When A Third Becomes 97 Percent: A Con That Changed the Western World - Breitbart

But the “97 percent of scientists believe in global warming” mantra became gospel on May 16, 2013, when President Obama tweeted “Ninety-seven percent of scientists agree: #climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.”

What the president was referring to was a 2013 paper by the University of Queensland’s John Cook. In his research, Cook studied 11,994 papers published between 1991 and 2011 that mentioned the search words “global warming” and “global climate change.”

Guess what Cook actually found? Only 32.6 percent of the papers endorsed the view of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming. But of that group, 97 percent said that “recent warming is mostly man-made.”​

As I pointed out earlier.....you cram that crap into your empty skull, hilarity will ensue....

You have failed to post anything substantive since you joined the forum. All you do is nit-pick at nothing.

Nothing "nothing" about your awe inspiring credulity

 

[Clementine]

It's also worth noting that while only a minority of scientists support the man-made global warming theory, that number is even less now because many scientists who originally supported it have come out and said they changed their minds after more research, namely realizing that much of the data they based the opinions on was seriously skewed.

Those that supported the global warming theory were heavily funded and likely were expected to come to a certain conclusion. No surprise that many scientists later came out against the left's theory.

Also, the solutions to it are what remain the biggest farce. Despite admitting that nothing they proposed will make a measurable difference, they won't let go of it. It's the most massive wealth redistribution in history and people have everything invested in this. Some countries will collapse if money isn't redistributed to them.

My nephew commented during a thunderstorm that storms are caused by global warming. That's what they are teaching them in schools these days. I wonder if kids are actually believing that storms will cease to exist if we allow cap and trade. Even the global warming bullshitters admit that they can't begin to explain climate changes in history, long before industry existed. They tried to blame the farmers of the past, you know the ones who didn't have any kind of machinery and plowed using horses. Yea, they did it by growing all that food. I'm sure today's Amish people contribue just as much.

The left wants cap and trade but even Dems in congress rejected it. Obama has still been trying to push it through EPA regulations. And the EPA doesn't answer to anyone but Obama as they create tons of new regulations designed to get money from companies.

It's all designed to control energy resources, which is crucial for a tyrannical government to take over. They need to control education, food, energy and healthcare. They also need a population unable to fight against tyranny, as in an unarmed society. Easy to see how all liberal policies point towards this.

Bottom line is that the majority of scientists reject the notion of man-made global warming, so the only scientific consensus is that libs are full of shit.

 

[bripat9643]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

 

[rightwinger]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

Liberals can't read, they just parrot

 

[CrusaderFrank]

The "97%" meme is total crap and fabrication, but it's all the AGWCult has.

 

[Clementine]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Yup, it's official. Reading is not your strong point since the article linked to sources that even libs can't dispute.

 

[rightwinger]

If Breitbart says so...it must be true




.

Shame liberals can't or won't read. The article offer links to back it up.


http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024;jsessionid=7A6A171F44AB9CB41E53329C54D3A8F3.c4.iopscience.cld.iop.org

http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/pdf

http://www.iop.org/news/13/may/page_60200.html

You don't understand statistics any better than Breitbart

We understand lying, cherry picking and propaganda.

And you quote Breitbart

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

Yup, it's official. Reading is not your strong point since the article linked to sources that even libs can't dispute.

Conservatives and statistics
Totally clueless....no wonder they rely on Breitbart

From your link


We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming.

So the methodology is to look at climate abstracts that mention climate change or global warming. It doesn't mean they were about climate change......only mention it
Two thirds did not form an opinion.

Of those reaching a conclusion...97% endorsed

ONLY 0.7% rejected AGW

 

[Clementine]

Every argument with libs regarding man-made global warming goes like this:


Lib: It's real and there's a consensus.

Rational person: No, only a minority agree.

Lib: It's real, anyway. Al Gore says so.

Rational person: But, less than a third of scientists support the theory and they were well-paid to support it.

Lib: I don't trust your source.

Rational person: The source is the actual data that has been proven to be skewed.

Lib: You're a denier. You're evil. ( More name calling ensures.)

Rational person: Climate change has existed for thousands of years.

Lib: So, it was cow farts, farmers and cavemen's fires that did it.

Rational person: The proposed solutions won't change anything and will destroy the economy.

Lib: Denier! Denier! Denier!!! Whaaaa, Al Gore says so.

 

[OKTexas]

Last line of the abstract:

Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

What do you fail to understand that there are no research grants for people with opposing views. You only need to follow the money. AWG is bought and paid for.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Last line of the abstract:

Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.

What do you fail to understand that there are no research grants for people with opposing views. You only need to follow the money. AWG is bought and paid for.

No grants for people with opposing views? Please. If you're going to debate the subject, try do it intelligently and not by insulting us with your silly lies.