It is often said that there is an “overwhelming scientific consensus” that human activity is causing global warming, which is regularly supported by fact-check articles.
However, this slogan has been challenged by a number of prominent scientists over the years. Esteemed physicist and 2022 Nobel Prize winner Dr. John Clauser recently stated he does not believe there is a man-made global warming crisis. Scientist and Weather Channel founder John Coleman also championed his belief that “there is no significant man-made global warming” before his death in 2018.
Most recently, American climatologist Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology says this so-called scientific consensus is “manufactured.” Published in over a hundred scientific papers, Curry’s decades-long research includes hurricanes, remote sensing, atmospheric modeling, polar climates, air-sea interactions, climate models, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for atmospheric research.
Curry argues this false slogan about an “overwhelming consensus” has been fueled by scientists who pursue “fame and fortune.” Scientists who study man-made global warming are more likely to be quoted in popular culture while receiving celebrity-like status and lucrative grants from the federal government.
This has created “climate hysteria” among the general public, but isn’t believed by scientists like Curry.
Curry explained, “I was adopted by the environmental advocacy groups and the alarmists and I was treated like a rock star. Flown all over the place to meet with politicians. Like a good scientist, I investigated.”
Curry said alarmist scientists have been willing to do “ugly things” to push their politically-motivated narrative about global warming. The infamous “Climategate scandal” revealed that some scientists were hiding data and privately admitting in leaked emails that the Earth isn’t in a climate crisis.
Proof that Man Made Global Warming is indeed man made… maybe even Mann made… anybody gotta hokey stick?
It’s been a cult far too long. Unfortunately, no one’s making poisoned Kool-Aid drinkers.
The planet itself is just fine…always has been. The inhabitants, however, are fucked. And sadly, there will be totally innocent species taken out with the more troublesome ones.
Strike drinkers from that. Alcohol and editing don’t mix.
@Necrophidius
Trust me, depending on who you are editing, alcohol might be just what you need. 🤣
99 out of 100 will agree with the finding of who ever is picking up THEIR TAB! Don’t follow the science…follow the fukin’ money!
According to scientists we’ve had 5 ice ages, with sufficient warming periods in between to distinguish between the ice ages. Scientists also believe that we’ve had CO2 levels as high as 1200 ppm (we’re around 400 ppm now). Yet these cultists want us to believe that all of the mechanisms for billions of years of warming and cooling have disappeared and humans are responsible for climate change. Only an idiot (or John Kerry) would believe that.
@DavidW: we are actually still in an ice age. Ice ages have temporary warming periods too; this is apparently what we are experiencing.
But to the post at hand, in science consensus means nothing. Scientists can have a consensus that the sun revolves around the earth – but that does not make it true. But the “elite” (i.e. rich and powerful) exert a lot of influence over scientists and researchers, and scientists and researchers will then likely find results which keep their patrons happy. (Look up scientific bias some time).
Climate study is incredibly complex, and I don’t believe scientists understand it very well – they certainly don’t understand it perfectly. But the IPCC and numerous governments, who don’t really understand science but do understand power, are desperate to find a boogyman that only they can stand up to, and an imperfectly understood climate monster seems to be the looming disaster dejour to justify their policies. I don’t trust scientists all that much, but I don’t trust politicians at all.
“Consensus of Scientists On Global Warming is Manufactured”
LOL, MOST of todays threats are ‘Manufactured’–
It’s a matter of deciphering one from the other.
Bottom line, it always comes back to carbon. And bottom line the earths atmospheric carbon content is currently .04%. And as far back in time as they can measure, still .04%. Talk to the hand, because I just won this argument.
I said that six months after it was rolled out. It was abundantly obvious with anyone with a legitimate degree in science or engineering. Something that is getting harder and harder to find every day.
The regressives want to get rid of the competition (fossil fuels) and FORCE us to buy their ‘renewable’ energy at whatever price and amount they deem fit. Don’t step out of line or Reddy Kilowatt will pull your plug.
If it’s consensus, it ain’t science.
I will never understand why most people can’t see through the make believe.
CO2 is *food* for plants – lower CO2, the slower plants grow. And here I thought plants were good for the environment… ugh.
I read an article a while back (sorry, can’t find it) where they were spending something like $8 Billion to create a carbon dioxide generator around a chunk of rain forest to see how much CO2 it takes to kill plants.
I’m looking forward to seeing the results, even though I know these ‘climate scientists’ (meteorologists…cough cough) will ignore the fact that plants will grow like gangbusters in higher CO2 than we currently experience and instead, state that lower levels than we currently have of CO2 will kill all the plants…
FJB FGW
For more, read Gregory Wrightstone’s “Inconvenient Facts”. I swear you can hear the cultists screaming in agony in the background…
As that Bad Orange Man would tell you, the global warming consensus is not only manufactured; but also, offshored to China.
money. its always about the money. you dont give out grants to get to the truth. you give out grants to get the answers you paid for while seeming to be impartial. its always the money.
Water mist varies greatly and can occupy the lower atmosphere from around 10% humidity (or, 100,000 parts of water mist in 900,000 parts of air) to a little less than 99% humidity (when it rains), or 990,000 parts of water mist in 10,000 parts of air (990,000-ppm).
Average CO2 is approximately a steady average of 0.04% (worldwide), or about 400-ppm (400 parts of CO2 in 999,600 parts of air). This CO2 number is highest at sea level than in the higher mountain elevations since CO2 is heavier than air and becomes less the higher the elevation is, until around 160 to 180-ppm is reached where plants and trees no longer are seen on high mountain tops in the Summer.
Reducing CO2 down to 160 to 180-ppm world-wide can kill off all organic life starting with all photosynthetic organisms capable of turning CO2 into Oxygen and water, creating a catastrophic extinction level event.
So, to reiterate:
Water mist varies from 100,000-ppm to 990,000-ppm
Carbon Dioxide varies from 160 at high elevations to 406-ppm near sea level..
Reducing CO2 down to 160 to 180-ppm world-wide may create a runaway, catastrophic extinction level event for all living organisms.
The warmies, IMO, have to show evidence that the magnitude of today’s warming has never occurred before in the history of the earth. I don’t think they can do that.
See this chart: https://scitechdaily.com/66-million-years-of-earths-climate-history-uncovered-puts-current-changes-in-context/
The chart is accompanied by this statement from the warmies who put together the chart: A continuous record of the past 66 million years shows natural climate variability due to changes in Earth’s orbit around the sun is much smaller than projected future warming due to greenhouse gas emissions.
No. The hottest period of the earth happened during the Eocene era, 45 to 55 MYA, hotter than the current projections up the year 2300. These, again, are the warmies’ projections, not based on real data. Also, according to the chart, we are currently in an “Icehouse” climatic era. Being on average pretty damned cold, the world is naturally going to get warmer, according to the cycles we see in the chart.
To the warmies, the current uptick in temperatures is due to human activity, and not due to any natural cyclical change we see in the record.
The warmies’ statement does not line up with the historical data in the chart. Please someone look at the chart and the accompanying statement and tell me if I am wrong, that I have misinterpreted the data. I will admit I am wrong if someone points it out.
However, in the meantime, I maintain we are being lied to, bigly.
^^^^
Also, the chart I referred to shows that current warming started 25,000 years ago, and except for a few short-term dips (e.g., es around 1850) it has continually risen every year since.
^^^^
A big problem with the chart is that current warming and warming projections are shown in 150-year segments, from 2000 to 2150 to 2300. But the warming in the Eocene is shown in million-year segments, from 35 to 50 MYA. The climate variability on left side of the chart is not comparable to the climate variability on the extreme right side.
The chart does show variablity during the Eocene, but the timescales used are different than the one used for the current warming. We can’t see what the variability was in 150 year segments in the Eocene to compare to current variability.
The chart makes it look like temperatures are rising more rapidly than at any other time in history. But I think this is a false conclusion made to scare gullible people. This is using statistical analysis to fool the public.
^^^^
“The climate variability on left side of the chart is not comparable to the climate variability on the extreme right side.”
By “not comparable” I mean that because of the different time scales used there is no way to compare the warming from millions of years ago to the warming today.
^^^^
Another thing: in their statement, the warmies talk about variability. I don’t think variability, temperatures going up and down, is their main concern. Their concern is temperatures going up – global warming, and not up and down in cycles.
I think the chart and its write-up is all smoke and mirrors and trickery: “Look at this chart, people…this is why we need to cut your numbers in half, at least in half, to save the planet.”