Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
93 days ago.
by slinky
harryanderson
#1

Thankfully, the anti-science propaganda campaign surrounding man-made climate change seems to have lost some of its effect.

Are you seeing storm clouds on the horizon? Two recent studies suggest that the latest anti-science campaign is following its forerunners--the propaganda campaigns attempting to refute science that tobacco causes cancer, that CFC's caused the hole in the ozone layer, and so on—into oblivion. Global warming denial seems to have climbed to a peak in 2010, and global warming acceptance is now climbing. This bodes well for rational public policy.

 
 

Member Comments

Kendall78

More deflection from Tired...how shocking.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Me, too. The weekend after a holiday is my favorite. Have a good time, and we'll see you when you come back out to play.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

But I guess you gotta do something desperate when you can't change your mind and less than 3/4 of one percent of the 12,000 papers under consideration agree with you.

In other words, when the scientific debate over global warming is of enormous frustration to you, you gotta change the subject to a scientific debate over creation.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Exactly,'Kendall. Tiredofit repeats this pattern over and over. When his arguments come into question, he tries to change the subject.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Exactly,'Kendall. Tiredofit repeats this pattern over and over. When his arguments come into question, he tries to change the subject.

Posted 758 days ago.

Kendall78

"So as you avoid the obvious hypocrisy in your argument,"

I think he is trying to avoid the obvious attempt by you at deflection.

Posted 758 days ago.

Kendall78

"as we all pick and choose whats "science" we believe.."

The problem with this is that you don't give science much at all. You give opinions of other and appeal to authority.

Posted 758 days ago.

Kendall78

"When you take a result of 32.6% of all papers that accept AGW"

Actually, they took in the papers that gave a reason in their research for Global Warming. They didn't just take in the ones that were just AGW.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Thanks for raising this issue, Tiredofit, and once again confirming that only a tiny minority of scientists reject AGW.

The more you post and we investigate, the more robust the consensus becomes.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Less than one percent, as Anthony Watts admitted.

The consensus stands.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Again, according to Cook, et. al, as quoted by Watts, less than one percent of the 12,000 endorse your views.

That's why, as Joe Bast said, "the scientific debate is of enormous frustration to (you)."

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

And of course you, Tiredofit, try to deflect attention. You refuse to answer my relevant question and demand I answer an irrelevant question.

I ask these questions knowing full well you won't answer. But your avoidance tells the reader a lot.

BTW: I'd be glad to discuss my views on the origin of the universe. However, since that isn't relevant to this discussion and my time is limited, I cannot do so here.

Do you want to start a thread about it? Or should I?

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

And here's the real kicker. This quote was published by Watts HIMSELF. He got it from Cook's original press release.

"From the 11 994 papers, 32.6 per cent endorsed AGW, 66.4 per cent stated no position on AGW, 0.7 per cent rejected AGW and in 0.3 per cent of papers, the authors said the cause of global warming was uncertain."

Read it again. Less than one percent of the 12,000 papers "rejected AGW."

By the way, Tiredofit. Less than one percent of all the papers endorse your view.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Back to Cook's study. Watts says Cook lied. That article was published May 27, 2013.

Two months later, in a study to which I linked, Cook responded to Watts' charges. Cook asked the authors to rate their own papers. The self-ratings confirmed the 97% consensus.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

In fact, I'd say the important government figures who have harassed the scientists are a prime example of the out-of-control, evil big government you're always talking about.

Would you agree, Tiredofit?

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

In fact, it's a wonder ANY climate scientists would come out in favor of global warming given how Congressional committees, e-mail hackers, and powerful politicians like Cucinelli and Monkton have harassed and tried to discredit them.

I wonder how many climate scientists who know AGW is real fear speaking up.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

In fact, it's ridiculous to consider the opinions of those who express no opinion.

Remember the search terms used to select the papers. The authors searched for "global warming" and "global climate change." Those terms could be used in a large variety of contexts. However, our discussion doesn't involve all those contexts; here, we argue whether global warming is anthropogenic.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

I see no lie in Cook's study. The authors never claimed to study papers that expressed no opinion. Here's the 2nd paragraph of the original press release, linked to by Watts:

" The study is the most comprehensive yet and identified 4000 summaries, otherwise known as abstracts, from papers published in the past 21 years that stated a position on the cause of recent global warming – 97 per cent of these endorsed the consensus that we are seeing man-made, or anthropogenic, global warming (AGW)."

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Since you say we all pick what science to believe, Tiredofit--

Which scientists do you believe on this issue.

Posted 758 days ago.

harryanderson

Since you say we all pick what science to believe, Tiredofit--

Which scientists do you believe on this issue.

Posted 758 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or