From iGeek
This is a list of various studies that I've found interesting...
This is a list of various studies that I've found interesting... usually used for proving or at least supporting a point that I'm making on the site.
ℹ️ Info          
~ Aristotle Sabouni
Created: 2019-02-02 

Studies[edit | edit source]

  • APEGGA - APEGGA 2008 did a survey of their members and discovered that only 25.7% felt that Climate Change is primarily caused by human factors. So they did a follow up in 2012 and found that only 36% agreed with the IPCC claims on climate change, and 51% think there's little or no danger from anthropogenic causes. More of a consensus against the IPCC than for it.
  • American Meteorological Society - (AMS) looked at Climate Change 4 times and deep skepticism on the consensus view. For there to be a 97% consensus, there would have to have been 20,000 peer reviewed papers published in 2016 (there weren't), and all of them would have had to been on Climate Change (they weren't), and the entirety would have had to agree with the consensus view (they don't).
  • Bray and Von Starch - These two studies in 2003 and 1996 mapped how many (and how strongly) scientists agreed/disagreed with the Global Warming consensus, and it was a nice even bell curve, completely showing there was a spectrum of views, and refuting the idea that there was a blanket consensus.
  • Doran & Zimmerman, Anderegg, Lewandowsky - 2009 Doran & Zimmermann polled 3,146 Government Earth Scientists, then filtered out all but 77 that weren't published in a few pro-Global Warming journals, then asked them two vague questions, and concluded that 75 of the 77 were pro-AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming). There's the 97% they wanted to get to. But that's not science, that's propaganda.
  • George Mason University - GMU did study of Climatologists in 2007 and found that 73% thought there was proof of global warming. The 2010 follow-up found: "56% find IPCC untrustworthy”, "63% believe global warming is caused mostly by natural causes, and only 31% believe humans are primarily responsible”, "61% say there is a lot of disagreement among scientists”. e.g. No 97% IPCC consensus.
  • Harris American Meteorological and Geophysical scientists Poll - 2007 Harris American Meteorological and Geophysical Scientists Poll found that only 52% felt that the warming that was happening was "human-induced”. E.g. Climate Change is natural versus manmade was almost a 50/50 split.
  • Lefsrud & Meyer - 2012 Lefsrud & Meyer did a study of studies to conclude 36% have a "strong belief that climate change is happening, that it is not a normal cycle of nature, and humans are the main or central cause." (agree with IPCC), 64% fall into one of the 4 categories that are skeptical of alarmist global warming claims. And explicit endorsements in AGW has declined from 1993-2008.
  • Oreskes, Peiser & Pielke, Mockton, Shulte, Khandekar - History Professor Naomi Oreskes wrote a global warming activism essay that claimed her search on “global warming” found 928 papers, and 75% agreed with her view (and 25% held no opinion), starting the fable that there was 100% consensus on Global Warming. Peiser & Pielke, Mockton, Shulte and Khandekar all showed it absurdly bad science. Orsakes never defended.
  • - did a collection 1,350+ Peer-reviewed papers supporting skeptic arguments against AGW alarmism. This means the Consensus side needs to show a list of 45,000 papers that support AGW, to achieve their 97% claims, or we can agree that the claims of 97% are greatly overstated.
  • Sietz, Robinson, and Soon : Global Warming Petition Project - Physicist Frederick Seitz was President of the US National Academy of Sciences. He got 31,487 American scientists disagreed with Kyoto/UN on CO2 and Global Warming Alarmism. You'd need 1,049,566 Scientists to disagree to get 97% conensus, or 300,966 Ph.D.'s to sign the counter-effort, which never got anywhere.
  • Skeptical Science Studies - Psychology Student and Climate Activist behind the fraudulently named and often discredited Skeptical Science, John Cook, did a couple of "Studies" to try to prove the 97% consensus. Science is not proving your hypothesis by cooking the numbers, that's what he did, and we call that politics (FakeScience).
  • Strengers, Verheggen and Vringer - Strenger, Verheggen and Vringer did a direct survey of 1,800 international scientists who had published peer reviewed articles on Climate Change. Only 43% (797) of climate scientists agree with the IPCC claims that more than half of the observed increase in surface temperature was caused by manmade causes. (This isn't even the newer/bolder 90% caused by man).


🔗 More

List all the articles that have work to be done on them.

Main Page
The root of all evil... and the home page for this website.

Tags: TBD  Index

Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.