We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Castle

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: TimF9/27/2019 1:01:15 PM
   of 7702
What do 97% of climate scientists agree on?

Whenever the subject of global warming comes up, there is usually an appeal to authority, that the science is settled, that 97% of scientists agree.

Well, what exactly do they agree about? Here it is.

An invitation to participate in the survey was sent to 10,257 Earth scientists.

To maximize the response rate, the survey was designed to take less than 2 minutes to complete, and it was administered by a professional online survey site that allowed one-time participation by those who received the invitation.

This brief report addresses the two primary questions of the survey:

When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?

2. Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?

Results show that overall, 90% of participants answered “risen” to question 1 and 82% answered yes to question

The most specialized and knowledge-able respondents (with regard to climate change) are those who listed climate science as their area of expertise and who also have published more than 50% of their recent peer-reviewed papers on the subject of climate change (79 individuals in total). Of these specialists, 96.2% (76 of 79) answered “risen” to question 1 and 97.4% (75 of 77) answered yes to question 2.

There it is. 97% of specialists agree that the earth is warming, and humans are a significant contributor. Is "significant" qualified with statistical significance? Nope. The question is posed in an incredibly broad manner. Anything from a measurable significance to a primary contributor.

Now here's the thing, the scientists who identify as "skeptics" ARE IN AGREEMENT AND PART OF THAT 97%. Who the hell are the 3% that disagree?

There are many, many claims from the climate alarmists, those who claim we need to make significant changes, changes that would have profound negative affects to the economy, in the next 10 years, or its too late, that is not part of the 97% scientific consensus.

Those on here who say the science is settled are knocking down a straw man, the science is settled on the very basics, there is much much more theory to debate and models to test.

That reddit post linked to but I didn't see any content load from following that link.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext