97% is a myth

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
97% is only a myth if you survey outside of your close-knit group of ideological fanatics that are all receiving grants from the Global Warming Society or the IPCC.

...Much like the Peer Review system that provides 100% support when you float your research paper amongst the same crowd of leeches
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
97% is only a myth if you survey outside of your close-knit group of ideological fanatics that are all receiving grants from the Global Warming Society or the IPCC.

...Much like the Peer Review system that provides 100% support when you float your research paper amongst the same crowd of leeches
Read the article I see. It's is amazing how much of a religion the "Global Cooling->Global Warming->Climate Disruption->Climate Change" ideology has become.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
I posted it months ago, The Forbes version yesterday and even the study this article was written about.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
I posted it months ago, The Forbes version yesterday and even the study this article was written about.
And I posted it again today because there still are posters telling us if 97% of scientists agree then it must be so.
 

jambo101

Electoral Member
Sep 18, 2009
213
4
18
Montreal
And I posted it again today because there still are posters telling us if 97% of scientists agree then it must be so.

The vast majority of people around the world are not climatologists and rely on the scientific community to put forth the facts from their findings,When 97% of the worlds scientists are in agreement that man is adversely affecting the climate why would i disagree?
I'm told the Earth is round but i have no way to prove that other than scientists tell me its round and not flat.
Scientific institutions like NASA,NOAA, are credible representatives of the scientific community am i going to believe what they say or am i to believe what Limbaugh and FOX says on the issue?
Climate Change: Consensus
 

IdRatherBeSkiing

Satelitte Radio Addict
May 28, 2007
14,591
2,336
113
Toronto, ON
The vast majority of people around the world are not climatologists and rely on the scientific community to put forth the facts from their findings,When 97% of the worlds scientists are in agreement that man is adversely affecting the climate why would i disagree?
I'm told the Earth is round but i have no way to prove that other than scientists tell me its round and not flat.
Scientific institutions like NASA,NOAA, are credible representatives of the scientific community am i going to believe what they say or am i to believe what Limbaugh and FOX says on the issue?
Climate Change: Consensus

And this is precisly what this community has realized -- people will trust them without giving it a second thought.
 

taxslave

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 25, 2008
36,362
4,336
113
Vancouver Island
The vast majority of people around the world are not climatologists and rely on the scientific community to put forth the facts from their findings,When 97% of the worlds scientists are in agreement that man is adversely affecting the climate why would i disagree?
I'm told the Earth is round but i have no way to prove that other than scientists tell me its round and not flat.
Scientific institutions like NASA,NOAA, are credible representatives of the scientific community am i going to believe what they say or am i to believe what Limbaugh and FOX says on the issue?
Climate Change: Consensus

The scientific community has failed us rather spectacularily over the decades. Especially if you include Big Pharma as science.
Question everything. Especially when promoted by people that depend on grants to live.
 

Walter

Hall of Fame Member
Jan 28, 2007
34,843
92
48
The vast majority of people around the world are not climatologists and rely on the scientific community to put forth the facts from their findings,When 97% of the worlds scientists are in agreement that man is adversely affecting the climate why would i disagree?
I'm told the Earth is round but i have no way to prove that other than scientists tell me its round and not flat.
Scientific institutions like NASA,NOAA, are credible representatives of the scientific community am i going to believe what they say or am i to believe what Limbaugh and FOX says on the issue?
Climate Change: Consensus
See, another Kool-Aid drinker. 101 is another reason we have to continually get the truth out there.
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
You can READ can't you??

It is NOT 97% of anyone.....unless it is 97% of morons.

It's 97% of climate scientists.


Communicating the expert consensus is very important in terms of increasing public awareness of human-caused climate change and support for climate solutions. Thus it's perhaps not surprising that Cook et al. (2013) and its 97% consensus result have been the subject of extensive denial among the usual climate contrarian suspects. After all, the fossil fuel industry, right-wing think tanks, and climate contrarians have been engaged in a disinformation campaign regarding the expert climate consensus for over two decades. For example, Western Fuels Association conducted a half-million dollar campaign in 1991 designed to ‘reposition global warming as theory (not fact).’

The 97% Consensus is a Robust Result
Nevertheless, the existence of the expert consensus on human-caused global warming is a reality, as is clear from an examination of the full body of evidence. For example, Naomi Oreskes found no rejections of the consensus in a survey of 928 abstracts performed in 2004. Doran & Zimmerman (2009) found a 97% consensus among scientists actively publishing climate research. Anderegg et al. (2010) reviewed publicly signed declarations supporting or rejecting human-caused global warming, and again found over 97% consensus among climate experts. Cook et al. (2013) found the same 97% result through a survey of over 12,000 climate abstracts from peer-reviewed journals, as well as from over 2,000 scientist author self-ratings, among abstracts and papers taking a position on the causes of global warming.

In addition to these studies, we have the National Academies of Science from 33 different countries all endorsing the consensus. Dozens of scientific organizations have endorsed the consensus on human-caused global warming. Only one has ever rejected the consensus - the American Association of Petroleum Geologists - and even they shifted to a neutral position when members threatened to not renew their memberships due to its position of climate denial.

In short, the 97% consensus on human-caused global warming is a robust result, found using several different methods in various studies over the past decade. It really shouldn't be a surprise at this point, and denying it is, well, denial.


Debunking 97% Climate Consensus Denial
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
I give you robust evidence and you give me rhetoric.

I would love for you to be right and for this to be quackery, but I have to rely on legitimate scientific research.
 

petros

The Central Scrutinizer
Nov 21, 2008
108,907
11,188
113
Low Earth Orbit
12000 peer reviewed papers. 32% of those papers authors are 97% in consensus of AGW. The other 66% take no stance.

Get it?

One last time. If you ignore it, I'll never let you live it down.

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - IOPscience

We analyze the evolution of the scientific consensus on anthropogenic global warming (AGW) in the peer-reviewed scientific literature, examining 11 944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics 'global climate change' or 'global warming'. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming. Among abstracts expressing a position on AGW, 97.1% endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. In a second phase of this study, we invited authors to rate their own papers. Compared to abstract ratings, a smaller percentage of self-rated papers expressed no position on AGW (35.5%). Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors' self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research

Consensus my as$.
 
Last edited:

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Yes, obviously it's a percentage of the papers expressing a stance lol

That is 97% of 4000 papers which is a substantial body of evidence.
 

captain morgan

Hall of Fame Member
Mar 28, 2009
28,429
146
63
A Mouse Once Bit My Sister
12000 peer reviewed papers. 23% of those papers authors are 97% in consensus of AGW. The other 66% take no stance.

Get it?

One last time. If you ignore it, I'll never let you live it down.

Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature - IOPscience

Truthers can't afford to read that Petros, at least not objectively.

Their entire reality would come crashing down around their ears... And the grants would dry-up too - why, they wouldn't be able to afford to raise their offal as ideologues either
 

mentalfloss

Prickly Curmudgeon Smiter
Jun 28, 2010
39,778
454
83
Are you high? 66% makes the consensus with no stance you f-cking moron.

Yea you definitely like to shoot first and think later.


We found that about two-thirds of papers didn't express a position on the subject in the abstract, which confirms that we were conservative in our initial abstract ratings. This result isn't surprising for two reasons: 1) most journals have strict word limits for their abstracts, and 2) frankly, every scientist doing climate research knows humans are causing global warming. There's no longer a need to state something so obvious. For example, would you expect every geological paper to note in its abstract that the Earth is a spherical body that orbits the sun?

Skeptical Science Study Finds 97% Consensus on Human-Caused Global Warming in the Peer-Reviewed Literature