Do 97% of Climate Scientists Really Agree? (salaries, dollar, 2015, document)

[greywar]

Originally Posted by No_Recess

Al Gore isn't a real scientist?

But he invented the internet.

Probably one of the least factual complaints about him. The context of his statement matter, and the people who DID create it? They credit him highly for his work making it possible.

This is what he said:

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country’s economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

Statement by two of the people heavily involved in it defending Gore on this topic can be found here:
<nettime> Al Gore and the Internet

[Floorist]

Originally Posted by Shankapotomus

So scientist's cooked up this scam of going all over the planet taking core samples and temperature measurements just so they can make money?

It seems to me scientist's could have thought if an easier way to make money.

And if all these scientist's are just out for money, I'm sure they could make a ton as paid shills debunking their own climate theory for the fossil fuel industry.

Lastly, if you were a scientist who was going to make something up about the climate just to make money, why wouldn't you choose something you knew people wouldn't be able to doubt or challenge at any time?

Why has every climate model been way off?

[Floorist]

Originally Posted by Clarallel

I don't know what you consider a "good" video - but no thanks. I just did a quick peek at the internet, and Whittle seems to be a poorly educated guy with no serious expertise in anything. He's just a conservative with such a big ego that he does video blogs.

Let us know when you have something by someone reputable.

As to the question of your title, over 95% of actual scientists agree that climate change is real. Perhaps you should read up on information from experts.

You should read a little. The number was 97% and it has been proven as fake many times.

[Floorist]

Originally Posted by TreeBeard

You can either believe over 95% of the scientists as well as business leaders all over the globe who believe manmade climate change is real or you can believe a few pseudo-scientists and fossil fuel propagandists.


Your children's future is at stake. One side cares, one side will sell them out.

Another poster with the 95% which has been proven fake.

[Floorist]

Originally Posted by Pemgin

It's like Whittle doesn't understand that Bill Nye has made his career making science accessible to people who may not have any previous interest or knowledge in science. People like Whittle.

Nye's college degree is in mechanical engineering. He is not a scientist.

[Mtnluver8956]

Originally Posted by chucksnee

So, do you think those that are pro climate change, should fly jets or own yachts, then complain about the carbon foot print?

I can't tell them what to do. But most of the people you vilify, are not what you say and that irritates me.

[No_Recess]

Originally Posted by Floorist

Why has every climate model been way off?

A. Putin
B. The Patriarchy
C. Trump
D. Lack of safe spaces for snow
E. All of the above

(Answer: E)

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by jonesg

Science doesn't rely on consensus, thats a fallacy ad populum.

That's correct.

Science is universal, testable, repeatable, observable and falsifiable.

Originally Posted by chad3

The Oxford dictionary defines "climate scientist" as "an expert or specialist in climate science."
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/de...mate_scientist

But in actual terms "climate science" is a nickname for "climatology" or "atmospheric science."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatology

The fact that a discipline employs the Scientific Method does not make it "Science."

Science is universal, testable, repeatable, observable and falsifiable.

"Climate Science" is no better than "Economic Science" which is a massive fail.

If you want to look at actual Science, then we can apply Wien's Law: T (Temperature) = b / Wave-length. where "b" is a constant at 2,900 um-°K.

The principle absorption Wave-Length for CO2 is 15 um. Substituting we get:

T = 2,900 um-°K / 15 um = 193°K = -112°F = -80°C

To suggest that something cold -- cooler air -- causes warming is absurd.

Originally Posted by greywar

And please, don't start the "100,000 years ago" garbage.

Yeah, of course not, why include facts?

It's a simple fact that the previous Inter-Glacial Period was at least 10.4°F warmer and a recent study claims the temperatures based on the Greenland Ice Sheet were 15.3°F warmer.

If the Earth warms up another 10.4°F to 15.3°F the only thing you can claim is that it is as warm as the previous Inter-Glacial Period.

The Earth warms during an Inter-Glacial Period, that's what it does, and there's nothing abnormal about it.

Originally Posted by RedZin

The glaciers have been melting for years.

The glaciers melted during the last eight Inter-Glacial Periods. What of it?

[Mtnluver8956]

Originally Posted by Mircea

That's correct.

Science is universal, testable, repeatable, observable and falsifiable.



The fact that a discipline employs the Scientific Method does not make it "Science."

Science is universal, testable, repeatable, observable and falsifiable.

"Climate Science" is no better than "Economic Science" which is a massive fail.

If you want to look at actual Science, then we can apply Wien's Law: T (Temperature) = b / Wave-length. where "b" is a constant at 2,900 um-°K.

The principle absorption Wave-Length for CO2 is 15 um. Substituting we get:

T = 2,900 um-°K / 15 um = 193°K = -112°F = -80°C

To suggest that something cold -- cooler air -- causes warming is absurd.



Yeah, of course not, why include facts?

It's a simple fact that the previous Inter-Glacial Period was at least 10.4°F warmer and a recent study claims the temperatures based on the Greenland Ice Sheet were 15.3°F warmer.

If the Earth warms up another 10.4°F to 15.3°F the only thing you can claim is that it is as warm as the previous Inter-Glacial Period.

The Earth warms during an Inter-Glacial Period, that's what it does, and there's nothing abnormal about it.



The glaciers melted during the last eight Inter-Glacial Periods. What of it?

Industrialization was around during those periods? That's new to me.

[Floorist]

These scientists have said that the observed warming is more likely to be attributable to natural causes than to human activities. Their views on climate change are usually described in more detail in their biographical articles.

Khabibullo Abdusamatov, astrophysicist at Pulkovo Observatory of the Russian Academy of Sciences[74][75]
Sallie Baliunas, retired astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[76][77][78]
Timothy Ball, historical climatologist, and retired professor of geography at the University of Winnipeg[79][80][81]
Ian Clark, hydrogeologist, professor, Department of Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[82][83]
Chris de Freitas, associate professor, School of Geography, Geology and Environmental Science, University of Auckland[84][85]
David Douglass, solid-state physicist, professor, Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester[86][87]
Don Easterbrook, emeritus professor of geology, Western Washington University[88][89]
William Happer, physicist specializing in optics and spectroscopy; emeritus professor, Princeton University[90][91]
Ole Humlum, professor of geology at the University of Oslo[92][93]
Wibjörn Karlén, professor emeritus of geography and geology at the University of Stockholm.[94][95]
William Kininmonth, meteorologist, former Australian delegate to World Meteorological Organization Commission for Climatology[96][97]
David Legates, associate professor of geography and director of the Center for Climatic Research, University of Delaware[98][99]
Anthony Lupo, professor of atmospheric science at the University of Missouri[100][101]
Tad Murty, oceanographer; adjunct professor, Departments of Civil Engineering and Earth Sciences, University of Ottawa[102][103]
Tim Patterson, paleoclimatologist and professor of geology at Carleton University in Canada.[104][105]
Ian Plimer, professor emeritus of mining geology, the University of Adelaide.[106][107]
Arthur B. Robinson, American politician, biochemist and former faculty member at the University of California, San Diego[108][109]
Murry Salby, atmospheric scientist, former professor at Macquarie University and University of Colorado[110][111]
Nicola Scafetta, research scientist in the physics department at Duke University[112][113][114]
Tom Segalstad, geologist; associate professor at University of Oslo[115][116]
Nir Shaviv, professor of physics focusing on astrophysics and climate science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem[117][118]
Fred Singer, professor emeritus of environmental sciences at the University of Virginia[119][120][121][122]
Willie Soon, astrophysicist, Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics[123][124]
Roy Spencer, meteorologist; principal research scientist, University of Alabama in Huntsville[125][126]
Henrik Svensmark, physicist, Danish National Space Center[127][128]
George H. Taylor, retired director of the Oregon Climate Service at Oregon State University[129][130]
Jan Veizer, environmental geochemist, professor emeritus from University of Ottawa[131][132]
Scientists arguing that the cause of global warming is unknown

These scientists have said that no principal cause can be ascribed to the observed rising temperatures, whether man-made or natural.

Syun-Ichi Akasofu, retired professor of geophysics and founding director of the International Arctic Research Center of the University of Alaska Fairbanks.[133][134]
Claude Allègre, French politician; geochemist, emeritus professor at Institute of Geophysics (Paris).[135][136]
Robert Balling, a professor of geography at Arizona State University.[137][138]
PÃ¥l Brekke, solar astrophycisist, senior advisor Norwegian Space Centre.[139][140]
John Christy, professor of atmospheric science and director of the Earth System Science Center at the University of Alabama in Huntsville, contributor to several IPCC reports.[141][142][143]
Petr Chylek, space and remote sensing sciences researcher, Los Alamos National Laboratory.[144][145]
David Deming, geology professor at the University of Oklahoma.[146][147]
Stanley B. Goldenberg a meteorologist with NOAA/AOML's Hurricane Research Division [148] [149]
Vincent R. Gray, New Zealand physical chemist with expertise in coal ashes[150][151]
Keith E. Idso, botanist, former adjunct professor of biology at Maricopa County Community College District and the vice president of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change[152][153]
Antonino Zichichi, emeritus professor of nuclear physics at the University of Bologna and president of the World Federation of Scientists.[154][155]
Kary Mullis, 1993 Nobel Laureate in Chemistry