I often see this type of information. Is it time we demand an investigation into the real truth??

Question

Richard S. Lindzen is the Alfred P. Sloan Professor of Meteorology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Why, one might wonder, is there such insistence on scientific unanimity on the warming issue? After all, unanimity in science is virtually nonexistent on far less complex matters. Unanimity on an issue as uncertain as "global warming'' would be surprising and suspicious. Moreover, why are the opinions of scientists sought regardless of their field of expertise? Biologists and physicians are rarely asked to endorse some theory in high energy physics. Apparently, when one comes to "global warming,'' any scientist's agreement will do.

Public perceptions, under the influence of extensive, deceptive, and one-sided publicity, can become disconnected from reality. For example, Alabama has had a pronounced cooling trend since 1935. Nevertheless, a poll among professionals in Alabama found that about 95 percent of the participants believed that the climate had been warming over the past fifty years and that the warming was due to the greenhouse effect. Public misperceptions coupled with a sincere desire to "save the planet'' can force political action even when politicians are aware of the reality.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/regv15n2/reg15n2g.html

Answer 1

Wow, I actually agreed with Lindzen about something!

"Moreover, why are the opinions of scientists sought regardless of their field of expertise? Biologists and physicians are rarely asked to endorse some theory in high energy physics."

d**n straight.  It's time to stop citing the Oregon Petition and Watts and McIntyre and surfacestations.org, etc. etc. etc.

As for unanimity - um, how about on evolution, for example?  If the science is sound, near-unanimity is not uncommon among scientists.

As for his Alabama example, I can't believe Lindzen used a local weather example.  'Oh gee, the temperature in Podunk, Arkansas hasn't increased, so I don't know why they believe in global warming!'  Give me a break, Lindzen.  This is the kind of thing that makes me consider Lindzen intellectually dishonest.  He knows better.

Answer 2

It is a lot more than just politics, just look at current oil company profits and what they are doing with them under the table.

Answer 3

The real truth is what's out there.

"a poll among professionals in Alabama found that about 95 percent of the participants believed that the climate had been warming over the past fifty years and that the warming was due to the greenhouse effect. "

That pretty much mirrors the scientific community.  It's not unanimous, it is overwhelming:

EVERY major scientific organization has issued an official statement that this is real, and mostly caused by us.  The National Academy of Sciences, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Institute of Physics, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Meteorological Association, etc.

And a right wing think tank like CATO is not a more reliable source.

Answer 4

GLOBAL WARMING IS NOT DUE TO AUTO MOBILE EMISSION.

GW IS MAINLY DUE TO THE EXPANSION OF SEA SURFACE AREA, WHICH OBSORBS, RETAINS, AND TRANSMITS THE SEA SURFACE TEMPERATURE TO THE LAND AREA,    

Answer 5

The real problem is the Left propigating this and our teachers ,teaching it as though it was proven. The temperature data is taken from  old records of uncaliborated thermometers.  

Answer 6

I don't think an investigation into the truth will do any good, because on this issue, personal and political views and considerations have polluted many people's ability to objectively analyze the data.  There is a  Weather Channel, meteorologist, Heidi Cullen (last name might be wrong) who recommended revoking the certification of meterologists who disagreed with her view of mankinds influence on global warming.  (Do a google search and you'll find her article) I don't think anybody REALLY knows, scientist or not.  It's just theories.  The problem with this particular theory, that mankind is causing global warming, is that politics have gotten involved.  My own personal opinion, and no I can't prove it, is that the climate of the earth changes over time and there's nothing we can do to stop it.  And even if we could, what effects would that have further along in the future?  Global warming/global cooling whatever.  What I'm going to do is to try to adapt to the climate/weather, just like I do every day, every season, every year anyway.  I agree with what you are saying here up to a point though, the whole thing has gotten way too slanted and biased  Good question.  Thanks.

Answer 7

Real science is not done by consensus. Did Galileo have a consensus for his ideas? How about Einstein? All this talk about how many scientists agree on AGW just proves that it is a political issue, not a scientific one. Technically, AGW falls far short of even being a theory, much less a foregone conclusion.