Fox News Viewers Urged To Beware of Al Gore! Al Gore! Al Gore's Global Warming!!!! Don't Trust The Scientists!!! Beware The Cabal!!!
Al Gore!
Science
Global Warming
What the science says...
The consensus position is generally defined as "most of the global warming in
recent decades can be attributed to human activities".
There are several ways you can approach the debate on scientific consensus.
Scientist roll call Much of the debate seems to consist of a show of hands and
parading of credentials. On the one hand, you have assorted scientists as
presented in the National Post Denier series. On the other side, you have the
IPCC stating anthropogenic emissions are the predominant cause of global
warming. If the IPCC is not your cup of tea, the following scientific
organisations also endorse the consensus:
* National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
* Environmental Protection Agency
* NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies
* American Geophysical Union
* American Institute of Physics
* National Center for Atmospheric Research
* American Meteorological Society
* The Royal Society of the UK
* Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
* American Association for the Advancement of Science
Academies of Science from 19 countries
The Academies of Science from 19 different countries all endorse the consensus.
11 countries have signed a joint statement endorsing the consensus position:
* Academia Brasiliera de Ciencias (Brazil)
* Royal Society of Canada
* Chinese Academy of Sciences
* Academie des Sciences (France)
* Deutsche Akademie der Naturforscher Leopoldina (Germany)
* Indian National Science Academy
* Accademia dei Lincei (Italy)
* Science Council of Japan
* Russian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Society (United Kingdom)
* National Academy of Sciences (USA) (12 Mar 2009 news release)
Additionally, the Academies of Science from another 8 countries (as well as
several countries from the first list) also signed a joint statement endorsing
the IPCC consensus:
* Australian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Flemish Academy of Belgium for Sciences and the Arts
* Caribbean Academy of Sciences
* Indonesian Academy of Sciences
* Royal Irish Academy
* Academy of Sciences Malaysia
* Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand
* Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
Naomi Oreskes' survey of peer reviewed scientific literature However, it's more
relevant to examine peer reviewed journals - scientists can have their opinions
but they need to back it up with empirical evidence and research that survives
the peer review process.
A survey of all peer reviewed abstracts on the subject "global climate change"
published between 1993 and 2003 show that not a single paper rejected the
consensus position that global warming is man caused.
75% of the papers agreed with the consensus position while 25% made no comment
either way (eg - focused on methods or paleoclimate analysis).
More on Naomi Oreskes' survey...
Klaus-Martin Schulte's list of studies rejecting the consensus That is not to
say there are no studies that reject the consensus position. Klaus-Martin
Schulte surveyed peer reviewed abstracts from 2004 to February 2007 and claims
32 studies (6%) reject the consensus position. In these cases, it's instructive
to read the studies to see whether they actually do refute the consensus and if
so, what their arguments are. You can read a summary of Schulte's skeptic
studies here...
Judge the science, not the person Ultimately what matters is what a person says,
not who says it (that's not to say there's people I respect and pay attention to
but I don't automatically agree with everything they might say). In the global
warming debate, there are smart people on both sides subscribing to polar
opposite views - intelligence does not always equate to correctness. This is a
debate where people often form a view then muster up the arguments (valid or
not) to back up their preconception.
So note the credentials but ultimately, make your judgements based on the
scientific arguments.