As evidence grows to demonstrate the futility of trying to meet our energy demands from wind power, more and more pro-wind activists are quoting “The 97%” as justification. That is:
“97% of Earth scientists say that global warming is caused by Man”
AAWT has been looking at the basis for this claim and have discovered that it is largely smoke & mirrors. In fact,
75 Earth scientists believe that global warming is caused by Man.
About 60925 Earth scientists are either neutral on the issue or disagree.
An AAWT supporter has carried out a survey of the surveys which provides the detail and links needed to discredit “the 97%” claims.
The next UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report is due to be published on September 27th 2013, though leaked copies are now around. The report shows that earlier estimates of Anthropogenic Man made) Global Warming were wrong, the computer models failing to take into account one of the key factors - natural variability.
A computer model failing to include such a basic factor would also fit well on our ‘Monty python’ page!
Global warmers tell us “the science is settled…” The science is “settled” in the same sense that kidnapping settles child custody.
Richard Carpenter reviewing “The Inconvenient Skeptic” on Amazon.
“The Inconvenient Skeptic” was published in 2011 but is constantly updated on the web site. It is one of the few sites to address all elements of the science of climate change, going back over 6000 years worth of temperate data. This “book” provides a rational explanation of our constantly changing climate and exposes much of the grandstanding of ‘global warmers’.
It’s difficult to see how temperature changes since 1950 have caused such panic. Could there be vested interests at work??
Way back in 2009, senior scientists were not so much as casting doubt on the data collected by IPCC as complaining that they were not given access to it in order to test the veracity of its analysis. By repeating the data collection activity, it became clear that the analysis undertaken by departments associated with IPCC was, at best, inadequate, and at worst deliberately misleading. The statistical techniques used by these departments were inappropriate and did not take into account the realities of regional variations.
For a full analysis of what happened,