Views: 15382|Replies: 42

Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-2-15 19:56:08 |Display all floors
James Taylor, Contributor
I write about energy and environment issues.

OP/ED | 2/13/2013 @ 1:19PM

Peer-Reviewed Survey Finds Majority Of Scientists Skeptical Of Global Warming Crisis

                                                                                                                                   

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

It is becoming clear that not only do many scientists dispute the asserted global warming crisis, but these skeptical scientists may indeed form a scientific consensus. Don’t look now, but maybe a scientific consensus exists concerning global warming after all. Only 36 percent of geoscientists and engineers believe that humans are creating a global warming crisis, according to a survey reported in the peer-reviewed Organization Studies. By contrast, a strong majority of the 1,077 respondents believe that nature is the primary cause of recent global warming and/or that future global warming will not be a very serious problem.
The survey results show geoscientists (also known as earth scientists) and engineers hold similar views as meteorologists. Two recent surveys of meteorologists (summarized here and here) revealed similar skepticism of alarmist global warming claims. According to the newly published survey of geoscientists and engineers, merely 36 percent of respondents fit the “Comply with Kyoto” model. The scientists in this group “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.” The authors of the survey report, however, note that the overwhelming majority of scientists fall within four other models, each of which is skeptical of alarmist global warming claims.The survey finds that 24 percent of the scientist respondents fit the “Nature Is Overwhelming” model. “In their diagnostic framing, they believe that changes to the climate are natural, normal cycles of the Earth.” Moreover, “they strongly disagree that climate change poses any significant public risk and see no impact on their personal lives.” Another group of scientists fit the “Fatalists” model. These scientists, comprising 17 percent of the respondents, “diagnose climate change as both human- and naturally caused. ‘Fatalists’ consider climate change to be a smaller public risk with little impact on their personal life. They are skeptical that the scientific debate is settled regarding the IPCC modeling.” These scientists are likely to ask, “How can anyone take action if research is biased?”The next largest group of scientists, comprising 10 percent of respondents, fit the “Economic Responsibility” model. These scientists “diagnose climate change as being natural or human caused. More than any other group, they underscore that the ‘real’ cause of climate change is unknown as nature is forever changing and uncontrollable. Similar to the ‘nature is overwhelming’ adherents, they disagree that climate change poses any significant public risk and see no impact on their personal life. They are also less likely to believe that the scientific debate is settled and that the IPCC modeling is accurate. In their prognostic framing, they point to the harm the Kyoto Protocol and all regulation will do to the economy.”The final group of scientists, comprising 5 percent of the respondents, fit the “Regulation Activists” model. These scientists “diagnose climate change as being both human- and naturally caused, posing a moderate public risk, with only slight impact on their personal life.” Moreover, “They are also skeptical with regard to the scientific debate being settled and are the most indecisive whether IPCC modeling is accurate.”Taken together, these four skeptical groups numerically blow away the 36 percent of scientists who believe global warming is human caused and a serious concern.One interesting aspect of this new survey is the unmistakably alarmist bent of the survey takers. They frequently use terms such as “denier” to describe scientists who are skeptical of an asserted global warming crisis, and they refer to skeptical scientists as “speaking against climate science” rather than “speaking against asserted climate projections.” Accordingly, alarmists will have a hard time arguing the survey is biased or somehow connected to the ‘vast right-wing climate denial machine.’Another interesting aspect of this new survey is that it reports on the beliefs of scientists themselves rather than bureaucrats who often publish alarmist statements without polling their member scientists. We now have meteorologists, geoscientists and engineers all reporting that they are skeptics of an asserted global warming crisis, yet the bureaucrats of these organizations frequently suck up to the media and suck up to government grant providers by trying to tell us the opposite of what their scientist members actually believe.People who look behind the self-serving statements by global warming alarmists about an alleged “consensus” have always known that no such alarmist consensus exists among scientists. Now that we have access to hard surveys of scientists themselves, it is becoming clear that not only do many scientists dispute the asserted global warming crisis, but these skeptical scientists may indeed form a scientific consensus.





FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-2-16 02:51:17 |Display all floors
Related Article:

Science or Science Fiction? Professionals’ Discursive Construction of Climate Change

Lianne M. Lefsrud
University of Alberta, Canada
Renate E. Meyer
Vienna University of Economics and Business, Austria and Copenhagen Business School, Denmark
Lianne M. Lefsrud, Alberta School of Business, University of Alberta, Edmonton T6G 2R6, Canada Email: lefsrud@ualberta.ca
FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-2-16 11:24:58 |Display all floors
This post was edited by Revolutionar at 2013-2-16 11:25

#4

If you had read that paper.....which you didn't and could not......you will realized it is in indictment of r ats  like you.



But reading it does not fit your purpose, does it?


You just want the title to suggest itself.......
I've made my living, Mr. Thompson, in large part as a gambler. Some days I make twenty bets, some days I make none. There are weeks, sometimes months, in fact, when I don't make any bet at all because ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-2-16 14:30:58 |Display all floors
This post was edited by sansukong at 2013-2-16 13:39
Revolutionar Post time: 2013-2-16 10:24
#4

If you had read that paper.....which you didn't and could not......you will realized it is in in ...

The fact of the matter is: A Jackass like you can't and won't read. You bray and you are only good at making a nuisance of yourself at the command of your master.
Translate  .......

事实的真相是:如你不能和不会读的一头公驴。你只能像驴傻瓜惹,你只是在你自己的滋扰 在你的主的命令。



FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-2-16 15:24:37 |Display all floors
sansukong Post time: 2013-2-16 14:30
The fact of the matter is: A Jackass like you can't and won't read. You bray and you are only good  ...

You should read what you post before you cut and paste.


That is normal for humans even if not normal for rats.
I've made my living, Mr. Thompson, in large part as a gambler. Some days I make twenty bets, some days I make none. There are weeks, sometimes months, in fact, when I don't make any bet at all because ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2013-2-16 22:44:03 |Display all floors
The paper's quality is quite good - but the abstract, which is supposed to include findings, sucks.

Eitherway, according to the survey, 36 percent say climate change is anthropogenic. 10 percent say it's impossible to determine the climate change's source, and 22 percent claim that both, men and nature, contribute to the phenomenon.
So only  a minority believes that climate change is a pure natural occurance.
(However, what I find more interesting is: why do 96 percent of all scientists believe that they are "right"? )

But let's focus on climate politicis. Here, only 41 percent see regulations as a solution. And of those 41 percent, the vast majority considers the Kyoto regulations to be sufficient. Only 5 percent of all scientists actually call for more political action!

Personally, I am also holding a fatalistic stance. I believe that climate change is not as bad as some models predict. But I also believe that it is our responsibility to keep our planet clean. However, I don't believe that imposing stricter rules on oil use would help - as developing countries would burn the fuel that isn't burnt in the developed world (due to lower prices), rendering all efforts useless.
If I were to decide on the best policy against climate change, I'd advocate free markets and a freer development of nuclear technologies - especially fusion. Because as soon as there is a cheaper alternative, people will automatically stop burning fossil fuel all around the world - without any additional regulation.

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 6Rank: 6

Post time 2013-2-16 22:49:57 From mobile |Display all floors
sansukong Posted On 2013-2-15 19:56:08
James Taylor   , Contributor     
    I write about energy and environment issues....

Never trouble trouble until trouble troubles you
"Risk more than others think is safe. Care more than others think is wise. Dream more than others think is practical. Expect more than others think is possible."

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.