portland independent media center  
images audio video
composted article reporting global

alternative media | environment

Global Warming Consensus Looking More Like A Myth

Environment: 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.
Environment: 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.

Their work also revealed that 24% "believe that changes to the climate are natural, normal cycles of the earth" while another 10% consider the "'real' cause of climate change" to be "unknown" and acknowledge that "nature is forever changing and uncontrollable."

The 10% group, known as the "Economic Responsibility" cohort, expresses "much stronger and more negative emotions than any other group, especially that climate science is a fraud and hoax and that regulation is futile, useless, and impossible."

The 24% group, tagged as the "Nature is Overwhelming" faction, is the "most likely to speak against climate science as being science fiction, 'manipulated and fraudulent'" and is "least likely to believe that the scientific debate is settled, that IPCC modeling is accurate."

The researchers also found a group they call the "Fatalists" the 17% who "diagnose climate change as both human- and naturally caused," "consider climate change to be a smaller public risk with little impact on their personal life" and "are skeptical that the scientific debate is settled regarding the IPCC modeling."

Lefsrud and Meyer also note that "skepticism regarding anthropogenic climate change remains" among climate scientists. They mention, as well, that "the proportion of papers found in the ISI Web of Science database that explicitly endorsed anthropogenic climate change has fallen from 75% (for the period between 1993 and 2003) as of 2004 to 45% from 2004 to 2008, while outright disagreement has risen from 0% to 6%."

Read More At IBD:  link to news.investors.com
Follow us: @IBDinvestors on Twitter | InvestorsBusinessDaily on Facebook

homepage: homepage: http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/021513-644725-geoscientists-engineers-dont-believe-in-climate-change.htm#ixzz2LJQaRt9I

We had one of these articles 20.Feb.2013 11:12


The Indy bees deleted it. Or it's in the lost compost bin of 2013: http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2013/02/421986.shtml

Where I expect this article to end up.

But nice to see the climate change deniers indirectly admitting they share an agenda with traders on Wall Street. Your source:


"IBD provides detailed information about stocks, mutual funds, commodities, and other financial instruments aimed at individual investors. The newspaper provides detailed, concise statistics using earnings, stock price performance, and other criteria to help investors find quality stocks. "

A reader can see how such an organization wants to protect certain stocks. And they're after national health care too:

"On July 31, 2009, an editorial in IBD touted the superiority of U.S. healthcare and argued that physicist Stephen Hawking "wouldn't have a chance in the U.K., where the [British] National Health Service would say the life of this brilliant man, because of his physical handicaps, is essentially worthless."[7] As Hawking has always lived in the U.K. and receives his medical care from the NHS, the editorial was widely criticized.[6][8][9]"

You can't make this shit up. Enjoy your VISIT.

Are the Indy-bees crypto-fascist Antifa trolls? 21.Feb.2013 08:22


Once again, rex, the crypto-fascist Antifa troll, defends the Establishment position.