Study: 97% Agreement on Man made Global Warming (Counting scientific papers)

wunderground.com ^ | May 16 2013 | Angela Fritz

[catman67]

This is easy to achieve when those peer review journals blackball any article that contradicts the AGW thesis.

[GOPJ]

There was a time when 97% thought the sun revolved around the earth...

[katana]

And in the 13th century 100 percent of natural philosophers (the sort of people who would someday be called "scientists") were absolutely certain that the Earth was the center of the universe around which the Sun, planets, and all the stars revolved. The conjoining of the two words "science" and "consensus" should set off alarm bells for any thinking person. Especially when physical evidence that contradicts the "consensus" has been slapping everyone in the forehead for years.

The Emperor of AGW is parading buck naked and the high pitch desperation of articles like this is flinching reaction to the ridicule the writers must know, at least subconsciously, is coming. Some, maybe most, of them must know the their little game is over.

[olezip]

The research, the most comprehensive analysis of climate research to date, finds that 97.1% of the studies published between 1991 to 2011 that expressed a position on man made climate change agreed that it was happening, and that it was due to human activity.

If you recall, in the story about Chicken Little, most of the crowd agreed with Chicken Little that the "sky is falling."

Without more detail on the nature of the "studies" we may have a Chicken Little kind of report.

[a fool in paradise]

What’s the compensation payout when 97% of weather prophets predict rain this week and it doesn’t rain?

Where is the accountability?

[Madame Dufarge]

"You have to wonder how somebody can write (let alone read) the claims made here in the press release by Cook with a straight face. It gives a window into the sort of things we can expect from his borked survey he recently foisted on climate websites which seems destined to either fail, or get spun into even stranger claims. For example, compare these two passages of the press release..."

Watts Up with That: Fuzzy Math

[Jack Hammer]

Bingo!

[RedMonqey]

Sorry but the “97%” number is as bogus as the “90%” of people support “comprehensive background checks”
And even if it were true, science doesn't operate by “consensus” .

Before the Wright Brothers flew at Kittyhawk, “consensus” was man could not fly in “heavier than air” aircraft(non lighter than air, i.e Helium, warm air etc.)

[listenhillary]

You don’t need to apologize to me. /;?)

[kimtom]

"..This is easy to achieve when those peer review journals blackball any article that contradicts the AGW thesis..."

key words, peer review.

You find it difficult to get published in "science" journals unless you are politically correct or a evolutionist. "Tow the Line...boys"

oh yes, and if you want to graduate....you must see it my way......(sarc)

[DPMD]

What’s been proven is that lying wackos like to write a lot.

[elpadre]

yes, climate change has been happening since the earth was created - day by day.

Man in not smart enough to know how, or if, climate is changed.

We do try our best, we think we are really smart - but we aren’t.

Causes of climate change are cyclic, activity on the Sun and other factors unknown to mankind, IMO.

[logi_cal869]

Since the genesis of Wunderground was University of Michigan (same as Ayers' Weather Underground terrorists) and founder Jeff Masters supports IPCC hypotheses , is anyone truly surprised???

[RedMonqey]

That was’t a personal apology

But, listenhillary, We be cool.;--)

[Antoninus]

Yeah, and 100% of papers in psych journals claim that homosexual behavior is normal.

Of course, there's no way in hell you'll ever get a paper published that argues the alternative position.

That's what happens when science becomes subject to politics.

[justa-hairyape]

Weather wise it is a good site. Politically they are just idiots. The reason so many published studies support AGW, is that those were the only papers that would get published. We have the AGW trust admitting in emails that they were forcing journals to not publish contrary papers.

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Why wouldn't you expect Australia's Global Change Institute to support global warming. Interestingly, the paper also said 66% of the papers didn't reference a claim for climate change or it's cause.

So they really meant that a third of researchers believe in human-made global warming. Not exactly a consensus.

[catfish1957]

...and one of the warmest times in recorded history was about a 1000 years ago. Norse farmed and raised livestock on Greenland. Then those stinking Vikings started driving their SUV's, and then it was downhill from there.

Manmade AGW my ass.

[catfish1957]

I always wondered why Masters called his little pro manmade AGW whacko site, Weather Underground.

And hint to all, don't try to rationally argue it over there. He and his little minion mods will quickly zot any dissenters of the koolaid.