Of note to me....
“A 2012 poll of American Meteorological Society members also reported a diversity of opinion. Of the 1,862 members who responded (a quarter of the organization), 59 percent stated that human activity was the primary cause of global warming”
“only 22 percent thought that “all” or a “large” amount of the harm could be prevented “through mitigation and adaptation measures.”
“David Legates, a University of Delaware professor who formerly headed the university’s Center for Climatic Research, recreated Cook’s study, he found that “only 41 papers — 0.3 percent of all 11,944 abstracts or 1.0 percent of the 4,014 expressing an opinion, and not 97.1 percent,” endorsed what Cook claimed. Several scientists whose papers were included in Cook’s initial sample also protested that they had been misinterpreted. “Significant questions about anthropogenic influences on climate remain,” Legates concluded.”
“Ms. Oreskes's definition of consensus covered "man-made" but left out "dangerous"—and scores of articles by prominent scientists such as Richard Lindzen, John Christy, Sherwood Idso and Patrick Michaels, who question the consensus, were excluded. The methodology is also flawed. A study published earlier this year in Nature noted that abstracts of academic papers often contain claims that aren't substantiated in the papers.” (Ms Oreskes reviewed abstracts, not full papers)
“The survey's questions don't reveal much of interest. Most scientists who are skeptical of catastrophic global warming nevertheless would answer "yes" to both questions. The survey was silent on whether the human impact is large enough to constitute a problem. Nor did it include solar scientists, space scientists, cosmologists, physicists, meteorologists or astronomers, who are the scientists most likely to be aware of natural causes of climate change.”
“Surveys of meteorologists repeatedly find a majority oppose the alleged consensus. Only 39.5% of 1,854 American Meteorological Society members who responded to a survey in 2012 said man-made global warming is dangerous.”
So my take? There is no consensus. Most people agree man has some effect on the climate, but there is FAR from a consensus on whether that effect is significant, whether the resultant climate change is dangerous, and whether any significant change can be made by cutting CO2 emissions.
AKA, there is no consensus that climate change is dangerous and needs to be addressed through drastic measures.
Did you interpret everything differently? If so, please, enlighten me on what I’m missing.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I encourage you read the links I posted. I don’t know how you can say there is no scientific consensus.
Since you’re referencing the American Meteorological Society, here is their current statement on climate change.
“Why is climate changing?
Climate—the statistical description (both mean and variability) of the atmosphere–ocean–land–cryosphere system over a few decades—is characterized by the balance of incoming and outgoing energy, which strongly depends on the composition of the atmosphere. Consequently, climate can be affected by human-induced changes in atmospheric composition (greenhouse gases and aerosols) and land surface use/cover. Climate is also influenced by natural variability, which includes decadal to multi-decadal fluctuations of ocean circulation and temperature in the Atlantic and Pacific basins.
Anthropogenic (i.e., human-induced) climate change cannot be accurately characterized from linear trends over short periods, as these trends will likely have contributions from the incomplete cycles of natural decadal to multi-decadal variability. However, many of the above-noted changes in the past 120 years cannot be fully accounted for by natural climate variability such as the decadal to multi-decadal fluctuations of ocean circulation and temperature in the Atlantic and Pacific basins. Scientific evidence indicates that the leading cause of climate change in the most recent half century is the anthropogenic increase in the concentration of atmospheric greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide (CO2), chlorofluorocarbons, methane, tropospheric ozone, and nitrous oxide.
Other than water vapor, the most prevalent greenhouse gas is CO2, whose concentration is rising mainly from fossil fuel combustion, cement production, and deforestation. About half the anthropogenic CO2 input into the atmosphere has remained in the atmosphere, and the rest has been taken up by the oceans and terrestrial biosphere (i.e., soil and plants on land)—the two CO2reservoirs with which the atmosphere routinely exchanges large amounts of CO2, seasonally. Once introduced, the CO2 can reside in the atmosphere for 1000 years or more before it is removed by natural processes, with more than 50% of the introduced CO2 remaining in the atmosphere for at least 50 years and roughly 30% remaining for at least 100 years.
Water vapor is another important greenhouse gas, but unlike CO2, it responds quickly to temperature change. For this reason, it mostly acts as a feedback, amplifying the response of the climate system to changes in radiative forcing, for instance from long-lived greenhouse gases like CO2.
A third important greenhouse gas is methane, which is produced both naturally, primarily by emissions from wetlands and wildlife, and from human activities such as agriculture, landfills, and fossil fuel extraction processes, with the human activities responsible for the majority of emissions today. For example, methane is a by-product of the hydraulic fracturing (fracking) process for extracting oil and natural gas from underground. Methane is shorter-lived and much less abundant than CO2 but a much more effective greenhouse gas per molecule, with more than 30 times the warming potential of CO2 by weight when compared over a 100-year period. The concentration of methane in the atmosphere was less than 800 parts per billion before the industrial revolution and is now measured at over 1,800 parts per billion. As the climate changes, the production of natural methane will likely increase, for example, due to thawing of previously frozen carbon-rich soils in the permafrost zones of the high-latitude continents and the possible mobilization of methane trapped in hydrate form in oceanic sediment.
Human activity also affects climate through changes in the number and physical properties of tiny (nano- to micrometer diameter) solid particles and liquid droplets suspended in the atmosphere, known collectively as atmospheric aerosols, e.g., dust and sulfates from air pollution. Aerosols modify both visible and infrared radiation and can influence the spatial distribution of clouds and precipitation. Most aerosols originating from human activity act to cool the planet, partly counteracting the greenhouse warming. However, the time span in which aerosols remain suspended in the troposphere is much shorter than for greenhouse gases such as CO2. Stratospheric aerosols generated by occasional large sulfur-rich volcanic eruptions can reduce the global surface temperature for a few years.
Changes in land surface use from agriculture, irrigation, deforestation, and urbanization also influence the surface exchange of water and energy with the atmosphere, generating regional climate change.”
“Barring large increases in volcanic activity or decreases in solar energy output, reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emitted by human activity and/or accelerating the removal of these gases from the atmosphere is the only way to avoid much of the projected warming and its associated global-scale effects on sea level rise, precipitation and heat extremes, and ecosystem health. Adaptation could ameliorate at least some of the impacts of projected climate change on economies and human health.”
(Adopted by the AMS Council on 15 April 2019)
www.ametsoc.org
