Time to buy more Canadian wine? Climate Change is driving up prices in other regions
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
The 97% Consensus Results
Based on our abstract ratings, we found that just over 4,000 papers expressed a position on the cause of global warming, 97.1% of which endorsed human-caused global warming. In the self-ratings, nearly 1,400 papers were rated as taking a position, 97.2% of which endorsed human-caused global warming.
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?
This result was also predicted by Oreskes (2007), which noted that scientists
"...generally focus their discussions on questions that are still disputed or unanswered rather than on matters about which everyone agrees"
However, according to the author self-ratings, nearly two-thirds of the papers in our survey do express a position on the subject somewhere in the paper.
We also found that the consensus has strengthened gradually over time. The slow rate reflects that there has been little room to grow, because the consensus on human-caused global warming has generally always been over 90% since 1991. Nevertheless, in both the abstract ratings and self-ratings, we found that the consensus has grown to about 98% as of 2011.
The 97% consensus on global warming
[QUOTEIn May 1998 the Seattle Times wrote:
“ Several environmental groups questioned dozens of the names: "Perry S. Mason" (the fictitious lawyer?), "Michael J. Fox" (the actor?), "Robert C. Byrd" (the senator?), "John C. Grisham" (the lawyer-author?). And then there's the Spice Girl, a k a. Geraldine Halliwell: The petition listed "Dr. Geri Halliwell" and "Dr. Halliwell."[/QUOTE]
Hehe. This is from your link.
Humans have influenced the seas he says, what a fukkin idiot. Do the math, it's a lot of water.
If you won't buy Canadian wine you should go without. Canadians should only be allowed Canadian food and beverage everything else should be heavily taxed. Annapolise Valley Ciders are a very good choice, if you know what's good for you.
If you won't buy Canadian wine you should go without. Canadians should only be allowed Canadian food and beverage everything else should be heavily taxed. Annapolise Valley Ciders are a very good choice, if you know what's good for you.
From: The "El Ni?o" FAQ
Regarding the Global Warming Human induced theory
We don't know that for certain. Some studies suggest this may be true while
others cast doubt on the idea. Part of the problem is that natural changes in
the frequency and intensity of ENSO events have occurred in the last five
centuries for which records exist, and it is hard for us to distinguish those
from recent characteristics that might otherwise be attributed to greenhouse
warming. This is also a subject of great interest in research. Unfortunately,
while ENSO intervals are well matched to the political time scale that governs
our research funding (3-4 years), global warming is not.
El Niño has been occurring at least since people started putting thermometers
in the ocean around the middle of the nineteenth century. Moreover, archived
documents left by the Spanish colonists in Peru confirm that El Niño impacts
such as occur now (flooding, marine life disturbances, etc.) have been felt in
Peru ever since the first conquistador (Francisco Pizarro) set foot there in
the early 16th century. And, as far as we can tell from paleo-climatic indicators
such as geological evidence & tree rings, El Niño has been occurring for at
least thousands of years, probably much as it has during this century. It will
probably continue to occur as long as our climate system works the way it
has since the most recent ice sheets of the late pleistocene receded (i.e.,
needing to get rid of excess tropical heat as explained in the question
Does El Niño play a special role in Nature?).
Can't say if these folks at NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)think of themselves as 'climate' scientists or not though, so they might not be part of the 97%
of the 34% of those that bothered to respond to some survey years ago...so whatever....
Horse Latitudes
When the still sea conspires an armor
And her sullen and aborted
Currents breed tiny monsters
True sailing is dead
Awkward instant
And the first animal is jettisoned
Legs furiously pumping
Their stiff green gallop
And heads bob up
Poise
Delicate
Pause
Consent
In mute nostril agony
Carefully refined
And sealed over
Raggedy Ann
When the still sea conspires an armor
And her sullen and aborted
Currents breed tiny monsters
True sailing is dead
Awkward instant
And the first animal is jettisoned
Legs furiously pumping
Their stiff green gallop
And heads bob up
Poise
Delicate
Pause
Consent
In mute nostril agony
Carefully refined
And sealed over
Raggedy Ann
Like I said, El Nino is considered a climate change event.
More importantly though, it only accounted for 8% of the increased warming this year, meaning that we would have hit record temperatures regardless.
Obviously this is because of global warming from CO2 increases.
Guys, global warming is real.
You might as well just accept it unless you want to be angry for the rest of your lives lol