Do Those Who Doubt Climate Catastrophism
Lack Scientific Credibility?

Thousands of Ph.D. scientists have explicitly stated there is
“no convincing scientific evidence” that manmade greenhouse gases will
“cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

Raegotte Report





Author: James D. Agresti

The views of the Authors are not necessarily the views of Enigmose.

31,487 scientists, including 3,805 with degrees in atmospheric, earth, or environmental science and 9,029 Ph.D.’s in varying scientific fields, have signed a petition stating:

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.



“Heat-Trapping Gas Passes Milestone, Raising Fears,” declared a recent front page headline in the New York Times. The event that served as the catalyst for this article was the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide reaching 400 parts per million (ppm), up from 288 ppm or by 39% since the dawn of the industrial revolution in the mid-1800s.

Painting an ominous picture of the situation, the reporter, Justin Gillis, quoted scientists who proclaimed that:

reaching this milestone “feels like the inevitable march toward disaster,”

• “we are quickly losing the possibility of keeping the climate below what people thought were possibly tolerable thresholds,”

• “we have failed miserably in tackling this problem,”

• “I feel like the time to do something was yesterday,” and

• “It’s scary.”

Amidst these dire assessments, Gillis quoted and quickly rebutted a lone dissenting voice to these scientists: Dana Rohrabacher, a Republican congressman from California. Simultaneously, Gillis alleged that “climate-change contrarians” have “little scientific credibility.” Based upon such reporting, one would think that no credible scientist doubts that manmade global warming is a grave threat to the future of the planet.

That narrative, however, is at odds with the fact that 3,805 scientists with degrees in atmospheric, earth, or environmental science and 9,029 Ph.D.’s in varying scientific fields have signed a petition stating, “There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of greenhouse gasses is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate.”

In this article, Gillis made no attempt to support his allegation that “climate contrarians” have “little scientific credibility,” but in reply to an email from Just Facts, he referred to “the Anderegg study and several more.” These studies, however, do not substantiate his storyline. At best, they show that the most frequently published climate scientists think the earth has warmed over the past century, and human activity is responsible for most of this warming. Furthermore, even those relatively modest conclusions are undermined by significant flaws in the studies.

The Anderegg study

In 2010, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences published a study by Bill Anderegg and others entitled “Expert Credibility in Climate Change.” For this study, the authors compared the scientific expertise of 1,372 climate researchers that they labeled as either “convinced by the evidence” for manmade global warming or “unconvinced by the evidence.”

The Anderegg study found that more than 90% of “convinced” researchers had at least 20 publications listed in Google Scholar under a search for the word “climate,” as compared to only 20% of “unconvinced” researchers. HMmmm.... The Anderegg study is also plagued by other [numerous] issues, but this one alone is enough to call the results into question. And again, even if one blindly accepts the results, the study does not show that all credible scientists see global warming as a serious risk, which is the clear message of Gillis’ article.

The Doran study

Another frequently cited study about scientists’ views on global warming was published in Eos, “the premier international newspaper of the Earth and space sciences.” This article is entitled “Examining the Scientific Consensus on Climate Change” and was written by Peter Doran and Maggie Zimmerman of the University of Illinois. This study purports to show that “an unbiased survey of a large and broad group of Earth scientists” found that:

• 90% think average global temperatures “have generally risen” since the 1800s.

• 82% think “human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures.”

Doran study has a major flaw, which is that the results are based on an internet survey that yielded a 31% response rate. The authors point out that this is “a typical response rate for Web-based surveys,” but this has no bearing upon whether the poll is credible. The issue is not how the Doran survey compares to other internet surveys but whether internet surveys are even reliable. As it turns out, internet and mail surveys often suffer from a phenomenon called selection bias or nonresponse bias, which frequently makes them untrustworthy.

Gillis has cited at least two popular studies to support his claim, but these studies don’t prove what he asserts. Instead, they show near-universal support among the most frequently published climate scientists for the more moderate views that the earth has warmed over the past century and human activity has contributed significantly to this. However, these studies have substantial flaws that cast doubt on their credibility, and thus, it is misleading to cite them without qualification. Full Story @ justfactsdaily.com




Scientific Dissent - Climate Change

* Journalists have claimed the following about the science of global warming:




Miles O’Brien of CNN on whether “the Earth is melting because of carbon emissions”: “The scientific debate is over.”[CNN Transcript]

Bill Blakemore of ABC on the “debate” over whether global warming is “man-made or natural”: “After extensive searches, ABC News has found no such debate.”

Katie Couric of CBS on whether “the world faces a ‘planetary emergency’ over climate change”: “The scientific consensus is clear … [that it does].”

Jeffrey Toobin of CNN on whether global warming is a “problem”: “[I]t’s like acknowledging gravity. It is a scientific fact.”

Traci Watson and Jonathan Weisman of USA Today on “the vexing problem of global warming”: “[T]he issue is no longer whether it is real, but what should be done about it.”

David A. Fahrenthold of the Washington Post on “climate-change skeptics”: “Scientists around the globe have rejected their main arguments—that the climate isn’t clearly warming, that humans aren’t responsible for it, or that the whole thing doesn’t amount to a problem.”

Justin Gillis of the New York Times on those who doubt that “billions of people are in harm’s way” due to global warming: “[C]limate-change contrarians” have “little scientific credibility.”

* As of August 2015, 31,487 scientists, including 3,805 with degrees in atmospheric, earth, or environmental science and 9,029 Ph.D.’s in varying scientific fields, have signed a petition stating:

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth’s atmosphere and disruption of the Earth’s climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.

* Between July 1, 2007 and Dec. 31, 2007, ABC, CBS, and NBC aired 188 stories regarding climate change. Of these, 79% excluded any dissent about human-induced global warming

Full Study @ justthefacts.com



Global Warming Profits - Climate Change has been very lucrative for Al Gore. Gore and business partner David Blood, onetime CEO of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, co-founded Generation Investment Management (GIM). In a few short years they had produced nearly $218 million in profits. Gore used $35 million of this to invest with Capricorn Investment Group founded by Canadian billionaire Jeffrey Skoll, who was part of the team that produced 'An Inconvenient Truth', the Global warming propaganda flick, rife with inconvenient errors and distortions. This cinematic trash won 1. A Nobel Prize 2. An Oscar and 3. Grammy.

Linking Climate Change to Racism - Those who oppose the Global Warming theory are branded as "Deniers" which on a subliminal level links Global Warming 'Deniers' with Holocaust 'deniers'. It also frames Global Warming theory as undeniable, climate change as an impending Holocaust and Deniers as implicit is this foreboding genocide.

Snow in North Africa - Climate Change? Sphinx Covered in Snow

Climate Hysteria Climate Change News Archive