Global Warming Consensus Looking More Like A Myth

Image Credit – Wood For Trees and Werner Brozek

From the Investor’s Business Daily:

The global warming alarmists repeat the line endlessly. They claim that there is a consensus among scientists that man is causing climate change. Fact is, they’re not even close.

Yes, many climate scientists believe that emissions of greenhouse gases are heating the earth. Of course there are some who don’t.

But when confining the question to geoscientists and engineers, it turns out that only 36% believe that human activities are causing Earth’s climate to warm.

This is the finding of the peer-reviewed paper “Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change” and this group is categorized as the “Comply with Kyoto” cohort.

Members of this group, not unexpectedly, “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.”

Academics Lianne M. Lefsrud of the University of Alberta and Renate E. Meyer of Vienna University of Economics and Business, and the Copenhagen Business School, came upon that number through a survey of 1,077 professional engineers and geoscientists. Read More At IBD

The study, Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change, by Lianne M. Lefsrud and Renate E. Meyer can be found here.

A couple interesting quotes within:

“Third, we show that the consensus of IPCC experts meets a much larger, and again heterogenous, sceptical group of experts in the relevant industries and organizations (at least in Alberta) than is generally assumed. We find that climate science scepticism is not limited to the scientifically illiterate (per Hoffman, 2011a), but well ensconced within this group of professional experts with scientific training – who work as leaders or advisors to management in governmental, nongovernmental, and corporate organizations.”

“The vast majority of these professional experts believe that the climate is changing; it is the cause, the severity and the urgency of the problem, and the need to take action, especially the efficacy of regulation, that is at issue.”

The Investors Business Daily Article goes on to note that:

If the alarmists are getting only limited cooperation from man, they are getting even less from nature itself. Arctic sea ice, which sent the green shirts into a lather when it hit a record low in the summer of 2012, has “with a few weeks of growth still to occur … blown away the previous record for ice gain this winter.”

“This is only the third winter in history,” when more than 10 million square kilometers of new ice has formed in the Arctic, Real Science reported on Tuesday, using data from Arctic Climate Research at the University of Illinois.

At the same time, the Antarctic “is now approaching 450 days of uninterrupted above normal ice area,” says the skeptical website Watts Up With That, which, also using University of Illinois Arctic Climate Research data, notes that “the last time the Antarctic sea ice was below normal” was Nov. 22, 2011.

Read More At IBD

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

228 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Jeff Alberts
February 26, 2013 7:29 am

barry says:
February 24, 2013 at 7:38 am
So a sizable proprtion of geoscientists and engineers working for the petroleum industry in Alberta disagree with the IPCC assessments of anthropogenic climate change. And the opinons of these people working for companies with vested interests are immune to being influenced by their job? Because if we apply that premise generally, than the huge preponderance of geoscientists and engineers working for Greenpeace international that endorse the IPCC must also have come to their opinion independently of their job.
Anyone buy that?

If you believe that those who MAY work for the petroleum industry (not all the engineers/scientists you mention do) and therefore are making their statements based on a gravy train of cash, you have to apply that logic to the CAGW crowd, and add several orders of cash magnitude. I’ll believe the side that has the facts, regardless of funding.

1 8 9 10