The key to creating consensus is to ask really stupid questions
There is no question that temperatures have warmed since the Little Ice Age. There is no question that human urbanization and human data tampering has increased the mean global temperature reported by NASA.
So mark my ballot as yes on #1 and yes on #2, and count me in as a 97 percenter.
The person who wrote the first question actually thinks there is such as thing as “pre-1800’s levels”. He probably thinks the temperatures were “level” before then.
1. No, the temperatures have not risen since the Roman Warming Period or the Holocene Optimum.
2. Humans had nothing to do with it.
Actually, the person who wrote this was a she, a grad student at the university of Illinois.
Later the Cook BS methodology was used to confirm the 97%
Both cases were highly flawed
On the other hand, I am sure there is a distinct majority of scientists believe or want to believe this, because their bread and butter depends upon the AGW ideology, They like most everyone else have no understanding of the climate science.
Then she is a proselyte of Don Wuebbles, with whom I have debated.
http://www.atmos.illinois.edu/people/wuebbles.html
Don used to like to get in the papers and make ridiculously alarmist statements (5-7 degreees warming in 20 years!), and each time I would contact him personally and correct him. He is still quoted from time to time, but has scaled back on his world on fire meme.
Don Wuebbles, a professor of atmospheric science at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, points out, “If emissions remain constant, the concentrations [of greenhouse gases] will still increase in the atmosphere for a long time. The climate response that we’re seeing in the atmosphere now is largely due to emissions that happened 20 years ago.”
http://theenergycollective.com/jim-baird/2209641/climate-case-hydrogen
On one of our little discussions, I had more up to date charts and data than he did, and he asked me, “Where did you get those, I have been searching for them”.
Don tried the “Venus” BS on our first encounter, and then had to admit in the end that I was right.
He is actually a very likeable guy, and not cut out for the cut-throat world that Gavin inhabits.
But do you think humans has a significant influence on Global Temperatures? Nobody can argue against the local impact, but do you think that the log fire in a trappers cabin will melt all the snow on the surrounding mountains?
NASA’s global temperatures are the numerical average of a bunch of local UHI affected temperatures.
Hey, wait there. The guys looking after the surface temperature records make basically zero correction for UHI, so obviously UHI is not a significant human influence.
That means that the ONLY significant human influence on the meaningless so-called global average temperature, is the data bending by the anointed few.
From Barron’s article called ‘Failing Grade’
The credit downgrades have only increased since then, with Moody’s alone chopping the ratings on more than half the 2006 subprime residential-mortgage-backed securities it had rated, including a whopping 97% of the slices, or tranches, it deemed single-A or below, according to a compilation made by Morgan Stanley Fixed Income Research.
I bring this up occasionally because there are striking similarities between financial crisis in 2008 and CAGW. When the goals of many parties are aligned an extensive fraud can flourish.
Note in this case that 97% of Credit Default Swaps (CDS) were overvalued in 2006 by the experts. This is what brought down AIG and Lehman. Do you want to know how they did it? The guys writing CDS fudged the data, mixing in very risky mortgages with AAA rated funds and not being honest about the data.
The government mandated ratings agencies like Moody’s and S&P etc were in on it and ranked all these junk funds way higher than reality dictated.
Sound Familiar?
Yes, and the Ivy league MBAs vouched for the credit ratings.
Yeah, I tell my good friends on the left that I am among the 97% and they don’t comment or make any sort of acknowledgement.
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Is it a significant number?
There is no question that of the 3,146 survey respondents out of the 10,257 surveys sent, they only needed 77 responses to generate their 97% consensus. Try and do your taxes with this methodology.
Je suis un 97%er…
How long is a piece of rope!
“Thinking” is political “observations” are scientific. It doesn’t matter what anyone thinks the temperatures were,… show me the [unaltered] observations.
“Say it ain’t so, Joe”…… I mean Tony.
I couldn’t believe the headline but then I reread your statement and have to concede that I, too (gag…cough), am a 97% True Believer. I don’t know how I will come to terms with this. Well, I’m off to burn some firewood as it is getting cold here in Perth and “renewable” energy is too expensive.
“There is no question that temperatures have warmed since the Little Ice Age. There is no question that human urbanization and human data tampering has increased the mean global temperature reported by NASA.”
The question is whether the warming is potentially catastrophic. Based on recent trends, probably close to 0% of objective scientists would say that warming is potentially catastrophic during the next 50 years. We would hope human innovation would solve the “problem” by then anyway.