NewEnergyNews: 97% Of Scientists Agree – Climate Change Is Real

NewEnergyNews

Gleanings from the web and the world, condensed for convenience, illustrated for enlightenment, arranged for impact...

--------------------------

--------------------------

--------------------------

While the OFFICE of President remains in highest regard at NewEnergyNews, this administration's position on climate change makes it impossible to regard THIS president with respect. Below is the NewEnergyNews theme song until 2020.

The challenge now: To make every day Earth Day.

YESTERDAY

  • Weekend Video: Global Warming In A Cold Winter
  • Weekend Video: New Energy Jobs Booming
  • Weekend Video: Cities Unite In Climate Fight
  • THE DAY BEFORE

  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-What’s Happening And What To Do About It
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-World Ocean Wind To Quadruple by 2025
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Toward Europe’s Solar 3.0
  • FRIDAY WORLD HEADLINE-Storage For New Energy To Boom
  • THE DAY BEFORE THE DAY BEFORE

    THINGS-TO-THINK-ABOUT THURSDAY, January 11:

  • TTTA Thursday-Climate Change Is The Biggest Terrorist Of All
  • TTTA Thursday-Nuke Flop Sets So. Carolina Solar In Flight
  • TTTA Thursday-Denmark Demonstrates Year Of 43.6% Power From Wind Works
  • TTTA Thursday-Two Breakthroughs For Growing EVs
  • THE DAY BEFORE THAT

  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: What's Missing From The 100% Renewable Energy Debate
  • ORIGINAL REPORTING: New Direction For The Debate Over Cost Shift And Value Of Solar
  • THE LAST DAY UP HERE

  • TODAY’S STUDY: The UK’s Record-Breaking New Energy Boom
  • QUICK NEWS, January 9: Interior Dept. Trades Public Lands For Profits; Energy Dept Plan To Boost Coal And Nukes Bloocked; Southeast Utility Giant Misguided on New Energy
  • --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Founding Editor Herman K. Trabish

    --------------------------

    --------------------------

    Some details about NewEnergyNews and the man behind the curtain: Herman K. Trabish, Agua Dulce, CA., Doctor with my hands, Writer with my head, Student of New Energy and Human Experience with my heart

    email: herman@NewEnergyNews.net

    -------------------

    -------------------

      A tip of the NewEnergyNews cap to Phillip Garcia for crucial assistance in the design implementation of this site. Thanks, Phillip.

    -------------------

    Pay a visit to the HARRY BOYKOFF page at Basketball Reference, sponsored by NewEnergyNews and Oil In Their Blood.

  • ---------------
  • TODAY AT NewEnergyNews, January 15:

  • TODAY’S STUDY: States Step In On Utilities' Energy Plans
  • QUICK NEWS, January 15: “Stupendously” Expensive Climate Change; New Energy Almost half Of 2017’s New U.S. Generation; Record Competitive Prices For New Energy

    Saturday, February 01, 2014

    97% Of Scientists Agree – Climate Change Is Real

    There really isn’t much doubt. From IOP Science/Environmental Research Letters

    1 Comments:

    At 12:34 AM, Blogger Michael Davison said...

    Here are two inconvenient truths:

    1) Large scale economic changes which MAY be needed to address human caused climate changes will NOT occur until the debate IS settled. No, I'm not referring to the debate that the earth is warming, we all know it is. And no, I'm not referring to the belief that industrial activity is a factor in that warming, we all know it is. The debate that is not settled (as shown next) is over just how much the human contribution is a factor, as compared to other possible causes, and whether any substantial and costly changes in how we produce energy would really make a significant difference. That debate is NOT settled, and using false information (as shown next) to claim that it is settled, far from being persuasive, only results in a loss of credibility by those arguing that drastic measures are needed now to avoid a crisis.

    2) Here's the other, related, "inconvenient truth" - the unethical tactics used to misrepresent that 97% statistic, including numerous citations to published climate scientists who say that their papers were misrepresented in that survey.

    From link below:

    "...investigative journalists report the authors’ claims of a 97-pecent consensus relied on the authors misclassifying the papers of some of the world’s most prominent global warming skeptics. At the same time, the authors deliberately presented a meaningless survey question so they could twist the responses to fit their own preconceived global warming alarmism."

    "...The question Cook and his alarmist colleagues surveyed was simply whether humans have caused some global warming. The question is meaningless regarding the global warming debate because most skeptics as well as most alarmists believe humans have caused some global warming. The issue of contention dividing alarmists and skeptics is whether humans are causing global warming of such negative severity as to constitute a crisis demanding concerted action."

    "...the liberal media have been reporting that the Cook study shows a 97 percent consensus that humans are causing a global warming crisis. However, that was clearly not the question surveyed."

    "...The investigative journalists found Cook and his colleagues strikingly classified papers by such prominent, vigorous skeptics as Willie Soon, Craig Idso, Nicola Scafetta, Nir Shaviv, Nils-Axel Morner and Alan Carlin as supporting the 97-percent consensus."

    "...“Cook et al. (2013) is based on a straw man argument because it does not correctly define the IPCC AGW theory, which is NOT that human emissions have contributed 50%+ of the global warming since 1900 but that almost 90-100% of the observed global warming was induced by human emission,” Scafetta responded. “What my papers say is that the IPCC [United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change] view is erroneous because about 40-70% of the global warming observed from 1900 to 2000 was induced by the sun.”

    "...To manufacture their misleading asserted consensus, Cook and his colleagues also misclassified various papers as taking “no position” on human-caused global warming. When Cook and his colleagues determined a paper took no position on the issue, they simply pretended, for the purpose of their 97-percent claim, that the paper did not exist.
    Morner, a sea level scientist, told Popular Technology that Cook classifying one of his papers as “no position” was “Certainly not correct and certainly misleading. The paper is strongly against AGW [anthropogenic global warming], and documents its absence in the sea level observational facts. Also, it invalidates the mode of sea level handling by the IPCC.”

    Soon, an astrophysicist, similarly objected to Cook classifying his paper as “no position.”

    “I am sure that this rating of no position on AGW by CO2 is nowhere accurate nor correct,” said Soon."

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestaylor/2013/05/30/global-warming-alarmists-caught-doctoring-97-percent-consensus-claims/

     

    Post a Comment

    << Home