Not exact matches
A new commentary by Edward Maibach, Teresa Myers and Anthony Leiserowitz in Earth's
Future notes that most people don't know there is a scientific
consensus about human - caused
climate change, which undermines public engagement on the subject.
«Such surveys are often cited as demonstrating a near - unanimous scientific
consensus in favor of a
climate policy, when they never ask any question
about whether and to what extent the anthropogenic component in recent warming might be dangerous or
about whether a «
climate policy» should be adopted in attempted mitigation of
future warming.»
Lucas speaks as though a
consensus on
climate - change allows her to say whatever she likes
about the
future.
Summary: The expert
consensus was wrong
about global warming; the AGW hypothesis is without empirical evidence merit;
climate science is not settled, nor will it be in near
future; and
climate change will continue regardless of CO2 emissions.
But it does mean that the IPCC's
climate scientists were wrong
about future global warming, and that the
consensus is now changing due to actual
climate reality.
The majority of expert
climate scientists have reached the
consensus view that human activity has resulted in global warming, although there is debate
about how much the temperature will rise in the
future.
The term «enforcers of the
climate consensus» is a bitter and resentful way to refer to competent and productive
climate scientists, in particular those who care enough
about the current and
future impact of anthropogenic
climate change on Earth's ecosystems and on humanity.
It is intellectually dishonest to devote several pages to cherry - picking studies that disagree with the IPCC
consensus on net health effects because you don't like its scientific conclusion, while then devoting several pages to hiding behind [a misstatement of] the U.N.
consensus on sea level rise because you know a lot reasonable people think the U.N. wildly underestimated the upper end of the range and you want to attack Al Gore for worrying
about 20 - foot sea level rise.On this blog, I have tried to be clear what I believe with my earlier three - part series: Since sea level, arctic ice, and most other
climate change indicators have been changing faster than most IPCC models projected and since the IPCC neglects key amplifying carbon cycle feedbacks, the IPCC reports almost certainly underestimate
future climate impacts.