Infographic: Scientists Who Doubt Human-Caused Climate Change

Popular Science ^ | 1/10/2014 | Emily Gertz

[TigersEye]

Global Warming Skeptics Question Authority

Princeton Professor Denies Global Warming Theory

31,000 Scientists Rejecting Global Warming Theory to be Named Monday

German scientists reject man-made global warming

Real Scientist Uncover Serious Flaw In Global Warming Data

Physicist Howard Hayden's one-letter disproof of global warming claims [pre-Climategate]

‘Consensus’ On Man-Made Global Warming Collapses in 2008

[justa-hairyape]

It does not matter how many people are wrong. All that matters is that they are wrong.

All he has proven is that if you doubt the church of global warming, you probably wont get published or recieve grant money to publish.

And it looks as if the Russians are the smartest people on the planet. Explains why they fought us so well while being saddled with a horrendous economic system.

[piytar]

I know quite a few physicists. Don’t know one who buys into catastrophic AGW. Why? Because they understand the physics involved!

[LaRueLaDue]

“Popular Science” is not the same as real science.

What a stupid article. One more reason to never buy the magazine stand “science” magazines.

[reg45]

Since “climate science” is “settled”, there is no need for the government to waste money on any further climate research.

[tbw2]

This is more a measure of global warming advocates blocking contradictory research from publication than “consensus”.

[LaRueLaDue]

Edward Teller. A truly brilliant scientist, unappreciated by most of his adopted country and the world.

[logi_cal869]

Sorta like the hypothesis that Obamacare is just a power grab pandering to the Mexicans.

Go figure.

My take on the pie chart: ONE intelligent scientist that understands ‘science’.

[LibLieSlayer]

That same chart applied to science circa 1490... THE EARTH WAS FLAT. Peer review means that they all part of the same eco-mafia. They are liars, cheater and thieves.

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

Popular Science recently ended on-line comments -- mainly because they didn't want to give a forum to 'climate-change deniers'. I used to enjoy reading PS, and occasionally felt that I was being informed. Now, a reader isn't even being misinformed. It's become pure, unadulterated propaganda. It's a shame really. To see how far they've fallen, peruse their on-line archives. Go back several decades.

[SunkenCiv]

Thanks Graewoulf. For that matter, consensus isn’t democracy either — when the consensus is “single party state dictatorship”, that’s what exists.

[Mase]

[GOPJ]

Copernicus felt the earth moved around the sun. He didn’t believe the sun moving around the earth... He was outvoted by all the other ‘scientists’ of his time...

Politics has to do with voting... Science - not so much. Well, not ever.

[Oratam]

Powell, a past president of Oberlin, Franklin and Marshall, and Reed colleges . . . .

So, he's basically a glad-handin', back-slappin', fund-raisin' kinda feller.

[gusopol3]

The Wegman report identified a hard core of seven authors and a “social network” of forty-three authors with direct ties to Mann, and reported that this network had compromised independent research, perverted the peer review process, and so tied researchers to their public positions that they had become incapable of reassessing them. It criticised the team’s isolation from mainstream statisticians in other disciplines, and its grudging and haphazard release of the data required for verification of its findings. Most importantly it found that “the decentered methodology” used to produce the Hockey Stick “is simply incorrect mathematics”, that the Hockey Stick has “a validation skill not significantly different from zero”, and that its obliteration of the Medieval Warm Period and contention that the 1990s was the hottest decade in a millennium were “essentially unverifiable”.https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2010/07-08/the-tree-ring-circus/

I hope you weren't presenting the article you posted as in some way being valid

[Intolerant in NJ]

Well that’s nothing - until they want to put all deniers to death as they did Galileo for daring to suggest that the sun didn’t revolve around the sun, the science establishment these days is clearly wide-open to anything....

[noapology]

We learned that there is no such thing as “consensus” in scientific inquiry. It’s a political term, or maybe at a bridge club...”Ladies, I think I speak for everyone here when I say that Susan’s new gardener is such a hunk”!

Or in liberal circles, that all Conservatives should stop breathing up Earth’s precious oxygen.