Why haven't we been told that there is NO scientific consensus regarding 'Man-did-it' global warming??!!?

Question

A Canadian survey of scientists released on March 6, 2008 offered even more evidence that the alleged ‘consensus’ is non-existent. A canvass of more than 51,000 scientists with the Association of Professional Engineers, Geologists and Geophysicists of Alberta (APEGGA) found 68% of them disagree with the statement that ‘the debate on the scientific causes of recent climate change is settled.'" According to the survey, only 26% of scientists attributed global warming to “human activity like burning fossil fuels.” APEGGA’s executive director Neil Windsor said, “We're not surprised at all. There is no clear consensus of scientists that we know of."

http://epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Minority.Blogs&ContentRecord_id=865DBE39-802A-23AD-4949-EE9098538277

Answer 1

you missed the point -

the debate is weather its completely Human caused or its a completely natural event or a bit of both

Answer 2

If you want somebody to lie to you, James Inhofe will be happy to oblige.  Your mommy probably will too.

"Earth scientists and engineers" are not climate scientists.  I know a lot of engineers and geologists, and I know more about climate science than any of them (and I'm no climate scientist).  Frankly I don't care what they think.  Unless you actively research a subject, you're not an expert.

Answer 3

http://www.conservapedia.com/Extremist_A...

doesn't describe dana at all does it heretic?

Answer 4

Great work antartic, It shows how little deniers really look into the ideas they are supporting as can be seen by a number of the replies above.

We will have to see if this is a genuine question or a Jello like question, I have seen a number of his were he has been shown to be directly incorrect, disappear suddenly.

Answer 5

because evrybody is afraid of being penalized if they speak out against

it.

Answer 6

Any link that starts off referencing the 2008 climate conference in New York as "The event, which garnered significant international and U.S. media attention" should be taken with a grain of sand as it got little media attention as it quickly became obvious that few of those attending were actually scientists and the event was organised by the Heartland Institute.

Your link doesn't go the the Canadian site that is supposed to be the source of these 51,000 even the link within the story that directly references the APEGGA doesn't go to their site.

If you did you find the actual document yes it does put the figure of those who attribute GW to us at 26% this is true, strangely there is a second point that seems to have been left out in link statement (45%) attribute it to both natural and man made causes that would be 71% that think humans are having some effect which is basically what scientist are saying, once again, who is being deceptive?

As a further small example of deception the 51000 figure, the PDF on the original site also lists the number of responders it was 1077 a small difference?

Answer 7

I grew up hearing that cigarettes are not bad for you, All logic told us that sucking dirty smoke into your lungs was bad But we were told the opposite. And we were fooled. now if you drive into L.A. CA, you see the smog so thick it seems like mud suspended over the freeways.All logic you possess must tell you that we are changing our whole environment or your fooling yourself.    

Answer 8

Yo ure correct. There is no consensus about AGW. That theory was started here:

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/monckt...

Every day, more and more scientist are coming out against the man made theory. here is another expert who recently became a "denier".

Internationally renowned climate sceptic and solar expert.

Dana,

Then you are saying that many of the IPCC researchers are not "real Scientist"? Here is one of my favorite lines from the article, "Our problem with their inclusion on the list of Contributors to the IPCC WGII Fourth Assessment report is that their jobs are (in order) website-designer, administrative assistant (x2), and network administrator." Seriously, the admin assistants get included in the number of IPCC scientist.

http://www.climate-resistance.org/2007/1...

Answer 9

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.

Answer 10

A little something to digest.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Extremist_A...

Answer 11

because if the hoi-polloi had any idea that MAN MADE global warning was a UNproven premise all those people who have made money off the scam would lose out.