Homestead

No.........that's not what I asked you.

For years upon years we have heard that man made global warming is settled science based on 97% consensus of scientists.

In order too know that, you must know how many scientist are in the world.

Who made up the 97%?

What were their expertises?

You were pretty quick to dismiss 31,487 scientists and since 97% of the scientists disagree with them, they must make up the 3% that are missing in the 97% report.

We know who the 31,487 are and you seem to think that you are qualified to decide their qualifications and reject them.

I might ask what your qualifications are, but, never-the-less, lets see your judgement of the rest of the 97%.

You must know who they are and where they're from, otherwise how would you know what their consensus is?

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

you right wingers are truly reaching for any scrap of BS to talk about


I can read anyone's opinion in a published paper without knowing their name.. Can you?

my credentials?? I simply walk outside and see the results..

We have plants and animals who are doing better or worst due to the changing climate. And it has hardly started..

Ticks and other insects are worst then ever before because the winters have not been cold enough to kill them off.

Opossums and wild turkeys are common now in this neck of the woods and a few decades ago they never were found.

You want to know how many scientist their are?? Google it.. I will not do that for you.. It is easy and even a right winger can master the details..

You want names? find any of the 1000s of articles you do not like and look at the author name. it will be near the title..

Homestead

There is no evidence of man made global warming.

All of the so called evidence comes from computer models, that can't even predict next weeks weather, never mind weather 30 years from now.

You people have maintained that there is a consensus of 97% of scientist that believe in man made global warming and on that basis, man made global warming is settled science.

I know where that report came from and it is total BS, but, you accuse me of refusing to deal with facts.

So apparently you seem to feel that you're the one that is dealing with the facts.

OK, then fine, you guys maintain that there is a 97% of scientists that believe there is man made global warming.

I just showed you over 30 thousand scientist that disagreed with that.

You decided that they weren't good enough to have their say.

OK.................so tell me Mr. facts:

just how many scientists are there in the world, that you can claim that 97% of them gave an opinion?

Who are they, you must know who they are, as you know the conclusion they have come to.

You must also know what their qualifications are, as you have accepted their conclusions, so what are they?

How do their qualifications differ from the 30 thousand that have put their name down on a petition for the whole world to see.


Demanding to know the names and qualifications of the people who have come to a conclusion that the world is supposed to except and act on, is not reaching for anything.

The claim has been made, now back it up!

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

The conclusion...

The conculsion about man made global warming comes not from A REPORT, but from 1000s of peices of evednce over decades and continuing each day..

It also is not A COMPUTER model but a stream of them which look at differing possibilities.. It is a continuous process.. So is forecasting the weather..

If you have such a need for knowing the number of world scientists, look it up yourself.. I am not in line to do your busy work..


Find and read all of this...

Consensus on Consensus - Cook et al. (2016)
Authors of seven climate consensus studies — including Naomi Oreskes, Peter Doran, William Anderegg, Bart Verheggen, Ed Maibach, J. Stuart Carlton, and John Cook — co-authored a paper that should settle the expert climate consensus question once and for all. The two key conclusions from the paper are:

1) Depending on exactly how you measure the expert consensus, it’s somewhere between 90% and 100% that agree humans are responsible for climate change, with most of our studies finding 97% consensus among publishing climate scientists.

2) The greater the climate expertise among those surveyed, the higher the consensus on human-caused global warming.

consensus studies
Expert consensus results on the question of human-caused global warming among the previous studies published by the co-authors of Cook et al. (2016). Illustration: John Cook. Available on the SkS Graphics page
consensus vs expertise
Scientific consensus on human-caused global warming as compared to the expertise of the surveyed sample. There’s a strong correlation between consensus and climate science expertise. Illustration: John Cook. Available on the SkS Graphics page
Expert consensus is a powerful thing. People know we don’t have the time or capacity to learn about everything, and so we frequently defer to the conclusions of experts. It’s why we visit doctors when we’re ill. The same is true of climate change: most people defer to the expert consensus of climate scientists. Crucially, as we note in our paper:

Public perception of the scientific consensus has been found to be a gateway belief, affecting other climate beliefs and attitudes including policy support.

That’s why those who oppose taking action to curb climate change have engaged in a misinformation campaign to deny the existence of the expert consensus.

Homestead

If that were true, then those facts would make up the foundation that those 97% of scientists used, to come to the conclusion they came to.

So it should be very easy for you to list the names of those scientists which would allow us to see those factors they used to come to their decisions.

Unless of course global warming is a big fraud, in which case the 97% claim is a fraud, as well as any make believe evidence that was claimed that they used to come to that conclusion.

Why make this harder for yourself, we've been told for years that man made global warming is settled science and 97% of the scientists back that up.

So show me, who are these people?

How many of them are there?

What are their qualifications?

What is the evidence they used to come to their conclusions. Unless your one of the 97%, what you believe their evidence is, is immaterial.

They came to this conclusion, so show me their report which will include the data they used.

Unless it's a complete fraud, then that would explain why you can't produce it.

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

You right wingers are all the same..

So very lazy and dependent you must have other people do the work for you..

We need to end your uselessness.. It is time you people helped yourself..

You want name, sever were in the paragraph that I posted.. bet you could not find the energy to read or find the balance of it..

What information is used.. lord,, for dumb..

look outside, it is warmer then normal.. Up here we are about 25 degrees above average for over a week..

The bit of snow we had has melted.. the ice on the water melts in the day..

deer season came and went with no track able snow..

Now you want 1000s of names and volumes of information provided to you.. all of these can be found with an internet search..

You need to get off you lazy butt and do it yourself.. We are past the time that we are willing to provide for the useless and lazy of our society..

The dredge of the right wing will be ended by making them do a bit of work for what they want in life.

We who produce are sick and tired of giving to you while you produce nothing..

Homestead

Climates warm up and cool down. The earth has been doing that since the beginning of time.

Most of the earth's history has involved temperatures much warmer than today's.

In recent history the earth was dominated by Ice Ages.

The temperature has nothing to do with man.

I guess the CO2 emissions have reached all the way to Pluto?

Entire solar system is heating up! Scientists blame solar warming
There is reason to believe Earth is not the only planet in the solar system undergoing climate change, meaning CO2 emissions are not the primary force responsible for the rise in global temperatures. Growth of the dark spots in Pluto, reports of auroras on Saturn, polar shifts in Uranus and changes in light intensity of Neptune suggests something very strange is happening in the solar system.

Another affirmation of solar change comes from Pluto. Pluto resides on the icy outskirts of the solar system near a giant shell of astronomical bodies know as the Oort Cloud. Although Pluto resides in the coolest regions of the solar system, the dwarf planet is heating up. Specifically, Pluto’s atmospheric pressure has increased by 300 percent, which is more than any other planet in the solar system. Even more paradoxical, Pluto’s atmosphere is becoming denser as it travels farther away from the sun. Due to this, scientists suspect Pluto is at the forefront of a high energy region of the galaxy that the solar system is beginning to reside in.
http://www.space.news/2015-10-06-entire-solar-system-is-heating-up-scientists-blame-solar-warming.html