Global Warming Update..New Data

[Bill Ellis]

This is not what Al Gore and company want you to read and it's likely that you'll never see it published in main stream media.

DAILYTECH



SURVEY: LESS THAN HALF OF ALL PUBLISHED SCIENTISTS ENDORSE GLOBAL WARMING THEORY; COMPREHENSIVE SURVEY OF PUBLISHED CLIMATE RESEARCH REVEALS CHANGING VIEWPOINTS



Michael Asher

August 29, 2007 11:07 AM

In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes performed a survey of research papers on climate change. Examining peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science database from 1993 to 2003, she found a majority supported the "consensus view," defined as humans were having at least some effect on global climate change. Oreskes' work has been repeatedly cited, but as some of its data is now nearly 15 years old, its conclusions are becoming somewhat dated.



Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising.



Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers "implicit" endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no "consensus."



The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the "primary" cause of warming, but it doesn't require any belief or support for "catastrophic" global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.



These changing viewpoints represent the advances in climate science over the past decade. While today we are even more certain the earth is warming, we are less certain about the root causes. More importantly, research has shown us that -- whatever the cause may be -- the amount of warming is unlikely to cause any great calamity for mankind or the planet itself.

 

[Travis Munday]

Telling everybody that the Earth is getting warm, but it isn't Doomsday doesn't make you money...so you're right, this probably won't get nearly the attention of some high-flying theory that by next week, we'll all either be underwater, or have beachfront property.

 

[TomT]

I read an article the other day about the environmental impact of coal fires. It was very interesting and a little alarming. These coal fires may be causing more environmental impact then all the vehicles and industries in the world. Fires in China alone consume 120 million tons of coal annually.

This is link is not the exact same article I read but it's close:

 

[Richard L]

I just saw a news report where they were interviewing some scientist about Global Warming and he made a very controdictory statement that totally flies in the face of Al Gore and those who claim that Global Warming is caused by "Man"



He was speaking about the lost of many species of plants and animals that will be lost due to Global Warming and said, "The past 5 major loses of species (Like dinosours, etc) that we know of were the results of catestrophic climate changes"



That clearly tells me that it has happened before. It has happened numberous times. but none of those catestrophic changes were caused by man. None could have been prevented by man, and the influence of man has no direct impact on the climate on the global level.



As I have previously stated, Scientist have stated that the single erroption of a large volcano like the one that took place in the Phillipines about 8 years ago, dumped far more so-called greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere than man has contributed in the history of mankind.



Air polution is a far more danger to man, anilmals and plants than to the earth or the weather.



....Rich

 

[Ryan Schaecher]

Did you know that humans not only live on Mars but are driving SUV's? Yep, Mars has a case of Global Warming as well.... go figure.



The words "Science" and "Consensus" do not belong in the same sentace. It is the lack of consensus that defines the science.



I sure wish that someone had told the Union Pacific Railroad in the mid to late 1800's that their 'carbon footprint' was going to kill off the buffalo in North America.... wait they did that anyway. Remember when you would travel from <shudder> New York to <shudder again> Los Angeles by train? 2000 miles of BURNING COAL! Good thing that the Carbon Footprint notion wasn't too big an issue then or the PRK (People's Republic of Kommiefornia) would never HAVE BECOME A STATE!





/soapbox x2