Peer-reviewed study reveals majority of scientists are skeptical of ‘global warming crisis’

By Thomas Lifson, AMERICAN THINKER

Without the claimed “scientific consensus” on global warming or climate change, the Green New Deal becomes just another progressive con game, but with the highest stakes ever.

Writing in Forbes, James Taylor shows that the supposed 97% “scientific consensus” on global warming is false:

Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.

The survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims.

According to the newly published survey of geoscientists and engineers, merely 36 percent of respondents fit the “Comply with Kyoto” model. The scientists in this group “express the strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause.”

The authors of the survey report, however, note that the overwhelming majority of scientists fall within four other models, each of which is skeptical of alarmist global warming claims.

The genesis of the 97% figure was always questionable, but now, with an actual peer-reviewed study, it is time for the junk heap.

Shhhh! Nobody tell Ocasio-Cortez:

Trump: When I’m on the debate stage with one of these maniacs, I mean, how do you get to Europe? We haven’t figured that one out, we don’t use airplanes anymore.  You saw what I’m doing in California, right, they have a fast track, the fast train goes from San Francisco to Los Angeles.”

March 5, 2019 | 61 Comments »

Leave a Reply

11 Comments / 61 Comments

  1. @ Felix Quigley:

    Felix…no need to “rubbish ” me… If I had to run my life according to what was published in the Times (presumably of Israel-but no matter which Times) I’d be in a real mess.

    In Israel, there are about 20 National Newspapers. about 16-20 video outlets, and innumerable,,, well over 20-30 Internet outlets and they all have their own particular axes to grind. Some do it well… but most….. Pfooe….

    According to the most convincing and accurate article published on the subject OVERALL ..which we received on Israpundit this morning (and which, although I’d read this many times over the years already.. never occurred to me to put forward in this discussion..I’m embarrassed) ..is as follows…(a most excellent article -superb.)

    It has been well known and correlated for many years and we all ignored it.

    ….The overall trend for climate change is -according to the MAJOR experts -COOLING… And the ONLY REAL cause is ….the sun….. Put that in your pipe and smoke it…me bhoyo..

  2. Felix Quigley Said:

    But I care less what you call me or infer either. Just deal with what the Times article says.

    Or if you do not and will not deal with it just state why you will not and stop your very nasty evasion tactics.

    I prefer going to the most authoritative source in this debate
    ” Climate Scientist Patrick Michaels “

    Below is a transcript of Dr. Michaels’ and Mark Levin’s comments from the show on Sunday:

    Mark Levin: “Climate change, global warming, global cooling, we’ve heard it all. What’s going on out there?”

    Dr. Patrick J. Michaels: “Well, the surface temperature of the planet is warmer than it was 100 years ago, about nine-tenths of a degree Celsius.”

    Levin: “Nine-tenths of a degree Celsius, is that a lot?”

    Dr. Michaels: “No, it’s not a lot.

    “There are two periods of warming: one in the early Twentieth Century that could not have been caused by human beings because we hadn’t put enough CO2 in the air; and one in the later part of the Twentieth Century that either slows down or ends, depending upon whose data you use, somewhere in the late 1990s, only to resume with the big El Nino that covered the news over the last couple of years.

    “So that means that probably about half – maybe half – of that nine-tenths of a degree might be caused by greenhouse gases because when the planet warmed at the beginning of 1976 the temperature of the stratosphere started to drop, and that’s a prediction of greenhouse theory that’s not intuitive. You know, the great philosopher of science, Karl Popper said if you can meet a difficult prediction with your theory, you can continue to entertain your theory.

    “So, the theory’s right, but the application of it is wrong. It is nowhere near as warm as it’s supposed to be. The computer models are making systematic, dramatic errors over the entire tropics, which is 40 percent of the earth, and it’s where all our moisture comes from – or almost all of it.”

    Levin: “Let me stop you there.”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah.”

    Levin: “Who does these computer models?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Governments. There are 32 families of computer models that are used by the United Nations, each government-sponsored, and all of them are predicting far, far too much warming. The disparity between what has been predicted to happen, which looks like this, and what is happening, continues to grow.”

    Levin: “You know that for a fact?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah, because you can just look at the weather balloon temperatures. You can look at the satellite temperatures. You can look at something called the reanalysis data. They all behave in concert. So they’re showing the same thing, and the same thing is a lot different than this thing.

    “However, we need to call the special counsel.

    Levin: “Special counsel?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yes, because one model works. And you know what it is? It’s the Russian model.”

    Levin: “So let me get this straight. So all the government models are like this?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah.”

    Levin: “The Russian model is like this?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah. The Russian model has the least warming in it.”

    Levin: “And the Russian model has the least warming, and the Russian model pretty much follows reality …”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah.”

    Levin: “… what’s been tested over a few decades?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah. Correct.

    “You know, if we were rational about this— Think about the daily weather forecast. You know, you watch the weather channel. They go, ‘Oh, this model says that. That model says that. We think this one’s working the best, so we’re going to rely on that.’

    “Well, for climate forecasts we should be using the Russian model, but we’re not. We use this big spate of all the other models that has this warming in them that’s not occurring.”

    Levin: “Why are all these other government models – 31 of them, I guess …”

    Dr. Michaels: “Yeah.”

    Levin: “… wrong? And why do they all go in the same direction, up?”

    Dr. Michaels: “Because they are, what is called, parameterized. That’s, there all parameterized. Can I translate parameterized into English? Fudged.”

    Levin: “Okay.”

    Dr. Michaels: “They don’t get the right answer, don’t know the right answer for certain phenomena, so we essentially put in code steps that give us what we think it should be.”

    ‘Climate Change Denier’ Marc Morano Pushes Back on Global Warming Hysteria

  3. @ Felix Quigley:
    Felix, I never claimed anything about “the Arctic”, unless you’re talking about Greenland. Check the facts. Edgar has also been crystal clear about these points.

    It’s no use saying anything to you, when you choose to distort what we’ve said like this. By the way, the last time I talked to you, you compared me to Adolf Hitler. That is not the way to converse on Israpundit.

  4. Michael S All I know about you is that

    1. You claim to be a scientist
    2. You claimed that the Arctic is NOT heating up
    3. When a REAL scientific report is referred to you as I mention below you initiate evasion tactics
    4. When the unknowing Rongrand introduces this compromised Bastardi person you immediately fasten onto the communists and marxists are to blame
    5. We have seen this before. This was prevalent in the 1920s and 30s. But it was mixed in with Jews and Masons. It was especially in America, Poland, Ireland, Germany, Lithuania and the baltic countries, and above all in Francoist Spain.
    6. This is also what the meaning of how the report on the Arctic on this very site and thread has been dealt with. It takes the form of a silence mostly, and also evasive tactics. These evasive tactics are now very widespread…that needs to be stressed.
    7. What that tells me is something very serious. The meme that the communists are behind everything about Global Warming of the earth is so deep now in society that it is happening even on Israpundit. This has led to the very obvious things that have been happening on this very thread. The report, an a yearly report, has been made by a body called National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. There is a mass of information in this report. And since I challenged you on your position to the things in this report there has been only hatred and scepticism towards science. For those who know anything about Fascism, especially the Nazis and Franco, it is exactly the same method. And Stalinism then complemented this. As did Rongrand here. So these are the real issues contained in this article on Israpundit.

    PS You ask that I be disciplined…well that is not the first time for Trotskyism. It is in fact a badge of honour. I do Israpundit and all Jews a major service by seeking the real content of the cultural war now operating in the world and the great implication for Jews. It happened before.

  6. So Rongrand weighs in. I do not see eye to eye with Laura on most but she has often stated how much of a believer in Joseph Stalin is Rongrand.

    Now an interesting thing happens. Rongrand quotes Joe Bastardi and immediately Michael jumps on the politics of Bastardi.

    “is just another word for S o c i a l i s m/ C o m m u n i s m

    So interesting to me that this when all is said and done very unknown person (I mean this is the ent right!) Michael who is aping exactly Hitler, Mussolini and especially Franco is onto the hate communist meme.

    Except that it was never put across just like that. Hitler and especially Franco, the whole Spanish Civil War above all was fought on that dangerous myth, that the world was in danger from an alliance of communists/Jews/Masons.

    In the case of Hitler it was the Wiemar Republic.

    In the case of Franco it was the elected Republican Government.

    The suffering of the Spanish people at the hands of Franco were quite terrible.

    That is exactly the ground that Rongrand is on TODAY and is certainly the ground where this Christian fanatic Michael stands on.

    However the earth is heating up. It is caused by the build up of especially CO2 in the atmosphere and oceans. Man through greedy capitalism is having an effect on our earth which is totally provable.

    The latter. that it can be proven by evidence, is why when I introduce evidence from scientists as reflected int he Times article I quoted, there is

    1. Evasion tactics by people I mentioned
    2. Evasion and silence technique of Ted Belman

  7. Rongrand

    So you are saying that Bastardi and his book are an expert onthis subject of global warming. Again what has Bastardi to say about the evidence I produce contained in Times report about the Arctic heating up, basically melting?

    Does he say this is lies?

    Does he just say nothing in his book?

    Or what is he writing since his book is published?

    And what do you, long time supporter of Joseph Stalin, say about the Times article I have quoted on this thread on this site?

    WHAT DO YOU SAY RONGRAND ON THE ARCTIC?

  8. Ted

    As regards to the Candice/Rogan interview…generally when I think of global warming of ther earth I am concerned about whether the earth is heating up, or not heating up. The rest can come later. But I need in my own mind to ascertain that fact. Is it or is it not?

    I mean President Trump does say that it is all a scam, that it is not happening, let us have some global warming in this cold auditorium.

    That is the President!

    You Ted are using this Candice issue. I do not care about the woman. But you are using her to avoid making ANY comment on this issue, specifically on the Times article I have qwuoted.

    So what do you really think of Global warming Ted? Forget Candice for the moment. State your position on the heating of the Arctic as proposed in the Times article.

    Is the article lies…then a most serious scam?

    Is the article true…then points to disaster for our world?

  9. I noted that Michael had said that the Arctic was not heating and he also to illustrate this said that I should buy property somewhere int he Arctic Circle. I took that to mean as a refuge against Global Warming. He does not say things clearly. But basically he was saying the Arctic is not heating.

    I wondered about this and easily came upon an article in the New York Times which was a direct report on an analysis by an International body. We can go into who they are now or later. I mean that too is important.

    But the evidence that is put forward in this Times article is rubbished by these people…

    Edgar
    Michael
    Ron Grand
    Ted

    Edgar and Michael are together
    Ron Grand weighs in by reference to a book which I have not read
    Ted by his silence

    All of these will have read the article in New York Times because I made it super easy since I provided the live link

    But decided in their own minds not to answer it.

    The heading of the article says “Warming in Arctic Raises Fears of a ‘Rapid Unraveling’ of the Region”.

    Not one on Israpundit has said that that is untrue. Yet rapid unravelling of the region is a serious issue for humanity if anything is a serious issue for humanity, and once again to make it super easy the url is https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/11/climate/arctic-warming.html

    Are you all now trying to attack me politically and in a way personally because I am a communist and proud to be so, not a Stalinist like Rongrand?

    But I care less what you call me or infer either. Just deal with what the Times article says.

    Or if you do not and will not deal with it just state why you will not and stop your very nasty evasion tactics.

  10. The comment I had cited from Joe Bastardi’s book at

    https://www.heartland.org/news-opinion/news/a-weatherman-reveals-climate-truths was

    “Bastardi exposes a variety of real evildoers as mega-social engineers not truly concerned about the environment. He cites, for example, Christiana Figueres, executive secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change until 2016, who openly stated in 2015 the UN’s goal was to overturn market capitalism: in her words, “to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years since the industrial revolution.””

    and I noted that “to overturn market capitalism”

    is just another word for S o c i a l i s m/ C o m m u n i s m

    THAT, in a nutshell, is what “Climate Change” actually is, dressed up in scientific-sounding garb.

  11. Ted,

    I just sent a test post. Your system seems to be rejecting posts of mine with the words S o c i a l i s t and C o m m u n i s t in them. I double-checked that time, to make sure I entered the captcha.