Do You Know More or Less about Global Warming?

Question

Compared to the average college educated (not necessarily in any physical sciences) citizen of the US, do people here think that they know more, less, or about the same with regard to the subject of global warming?

Then please provide the basis for your opinions (e.g. read ???, have degree in ???, etc.)?

Answer 1

More.  Much much more.  I learned that there is no central theory of climate, and there is a huge amount of uncertainty to climate modeling and global warming.  We don't even know what "normal" climate looks like.

I've learned the American public gives climate scientists more trust than they deserve.

I've learned that the climate experts (and their cottage industry) rule out the discovery of unknown natural cooling processes, based on their own hubris and undue focus on extreme scenarios.

I've learned that Dr. Hansen has been playing Dr. Politician since 1976 and believes that humanity has made a "Faustian bargain" with the world.  Who is the DEVIL in his little analogy?  

The industrial revolution (capitalism).

In short, I've learned that most climate scientists (especially those at NASA) are unwilling to critically examine the hypothesis that anthropogenic CO2 is DANGEROUS, and I blame Hansen directly for a great deal of the hysteria and confusion.

Answer 2

To Ken and others who want to comment on my answer:

My source was not a blog, it is the book itself. Merely because you found the same information on some BLOG does not mean I got it there. I have the book - no need for blogs. And I was being true to what the book says. Other people such as the BLOGGER you prefer to believe are entitled to their opinion. I was not saying there is no debate on some of these points. I said there are problems with AGW and this was merely one of many sources I consulted that leads to that conclusion.  My answer was exactly on topic per your question: how much do I know and what is some evidence  for it. I gave you this reference because I thought you were genuinely interested in learning. It appears that was not the case. I don't intend to debate AGW with you. Thats not what I understand the purpose of Answers to be and I won't let you lure me into it.

I know a lot more than the typical person.

I am a retired PhD scientist and mathematician with lot of experience in the field of computer statistical modeling. I have published some of the most advanced quantitative work ever done in the fields of psychometrics and statistics. I wanted to find out all I could in order to have an informed opinion. I read the science sources on both sides of the argument (this took weeks). I have concluded the AGW 's have not proven their case. There are far too many flaws in the data they use, and especially in their computer models that are the basis for their dire predictions. There is far too much contradictory evidence to AGW that they cannot explain, especially data in the last 10 years.

I have a resume and publication list at:

www.CitizensEnergyForum.com/Biography....

and

www.CitizensEnergyForum.com/Publicatio...

If you really want to understand some of the AGWs shortcomings according to the most expert sources in the world, read this book:

The Deniers: The World Renowned Scientists Who Stood Up Against Global Warming Hysteria, Political Persecution, and Fraud**And those who are too fearful to do so

by Lawrence Solomon

Is The "Scientific Consensus" on Global Warming a Myth? Yes, says internationally renowned environmentalist author Lawrence Solomon who highlights the brave scientists--all leaders in their fields-- who dispute the conventional wisdom of climate change alarmists (despite the threat to their careers). Al Gore and his media allies claim the only scientists who dispute the alarmist view on global warming are corrupt crackpots and "deniers", comparable to neo-n***s who deny the Holocaust.

Solomon calmly and methodically debunks Gore's outrageous charges, showing in on 'headline' case after another that the scientists who dispute Gore's doomsday scenarios have far more credibility than those who support Gore's theories. These men who expose Gore's claims as absurd hold top positions at the most prestigious scientific institutes in the world. Their work is cited and acclaimed throughout the scientific community. No wonder Gore and his allies want to pretend they don't exist.

This is the one book that PROVES the science is NOT settled. The scientists profiled are too eminent and their research too devastating to allow simplistic views of global warming--like Al Gore's--to survive.

Al Gore says any scientist who disagrees with him on Global Warming is a kook, or a crook. Guess he never met these guys

Dr. Edward Wegman--former chairman of the Committee on Applied and Theoretical Statistics of the National Academy of Sciences--demolishes the famous "hockey stick" graph that launched the global warming panic.

Dr. David Bromwich--president of the International Commission on Polar Meteorology--says "it's hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now."

Prof. Paul Reiter--Chief of Insects and Infectious Diseases at the famed Pasteur Institute--says "no major scientist with any long record in this field" accepts Al Gore's claim that global warming spreads mosquito-borne diseases.

Prof. Hendrik Tennekes--director of research, Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute--states "there exists no sound theoretical framework for climate predictability studies" used for global warming forecasts.

Dr. Christopher Landsea--past chairman of the American Meteorological Society's Committee on Tropical Meteorology and Tropical Cyclones--says "there are no known scientific studies that show a conclusive physical link between global warming and observed hurricane frequency and intensity."

Dr. Antonino Zichichi--one of the world's foremost physicists, former president of the European Physical Society, who discovered nuclear antimatter--calls global warming models "incoherent and invalid."

Dr. Zbigniew Jaworowski--world-renowned expert on the ancient ice cores used in climate research--says the U.N. "based its global-warming hypothesis on arbitrary assumptions and these assumptions, it is now clear, are false."

Prof. Tom V. Segalstad--head of the Geological Museum, University of Oslo--says "most leading geologists" know the U.N.'s views "of Earth processes are implausible."

Dr. Syun-Ichi Akasofu--founding director of the International Arctic Research Center, twice named one of the "1,000 Most Cited Scientists," says much "Arctic warming during the last half of the last century is due to natural change."

Dr. Claude Allegre--member, U.S. National Academy of Sciences and French Academy of Science, he was among the first to sound the alarm on the dangers of global warming. His view now: "The cause of this climate change is unknown."

Dr. Richard Lindzen--Professor of Meteorology at M.I.T., member, the National Research Council Board on Atmospheric Sciences and Climate, says global warming alarmists "are trumpeting catastrophes that couldn't happen even if the models were right."

Dr. Habibullo Abdussamatov--head of the space research laboratory of the Russian Academy of Science's Pulkovo Observatory and of the International Space Station's Astrometria project says "the common view that man's industrial activity is a deciding factor in global warming has emerged from a misinterpretation of cause and effect relations."

Dr. Richard Tol--Principal researcher at the Institute for Environmental Studies at Vrije Universiteit, and Adjunct Professor at the Center for Integrated Study of the Human Dimensions of Global Change, at Carnegie Mellon University, calls the most influential global warming report of all time "preposterous . . . alarmist and incompetent."

Dr. Sami Solanki--director and scientific member at the Max Planck Institute for Solar System Research in Germany, who argues that changes in the Sun's state, not human activity, may be the principal cause of global warming: "The sun has been at its strongest over the past 60 years and may now be affecting global temperatures."

Prof. Freeman Dyson--one of the world's most eminent physicists says the models used to justify global warming alarmism are "full of fudge factors" and "do not begin to describe the real world."

Dr. Eigils Friis-Christensen--director of the Danish National Space Centre, vice-president of the International Association of Geomagnetism and Aeronomy, who argues that changes in the Sun's behavior could account for most of the warming attributed by the UN to man-made CO2. And many more, all in Lawrence Solomon's devastating new book, The Deniers