Climate change

[Wokko]

[Pies4shaw]

By all means:

http://climatechangeauthority.gov.au/si ... 0Union.pdf

[Pies4shaw]

Some other helpful info, with NASA answering both Big Questions:

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/33/which-i ... latulence/

https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/16/is-it-t ... te-change/

[watt price tully]

By all means:

http://climatechangeauthority.gov.au/si ... 0Union.pdf

While you're at it, what do the overhwelming majority of climate scientists say about climate change?

[Wokko]

By all means:

http://climatechangeauthority.gov.au/si ... 0Union.pdf

While you're at it, what do the overhwelming majority of climate scientists say about climate change?

That's not how science works.

[Pies4shaw]

By all means:

http://climatechangeauthority.gov.au/si ... 0Union.pdf

While you're at it, what do the overhwelming majority of climate scientists say about climate change?

Well, what NASA says about that is as follows:

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position" (footnotes omitted).

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

[pietillidie]

By all means:

http://climatechangeauthority.gov.au/si ... 0Union.pdf

While you're at it, what do the overhwelming majority of climate scientists say about climate change?

That's not how science works.

While we're at it then, how does science work?

[stui magpie]

By all means:

http://climatechangeauthority.gov.au/si ... 0Union.pdf

While you're at it, what do the overhwelming majority of climate scientists say about climate change?

Well, what NASA says about that is as follows:

"Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities. In addition, most of the leading scientific organizations worldwide have issued public statements endorsing this position" (footnotes omitted).

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

I didn't think that was in dispute

[Pies4shaw]

I think it depends who you ask in this thread.

[stui magpie]

Maybe it's just me, but there's a massive difference between accepting that human induced increases in greenhouse gasses cause global warming, and accepting that we are in a state of emergency with human induced climate change that will kill millions in the next few decades.

[Wokko]

If one scientist disagrees, and has debunked the theories of the "97%" (which is a rubbish figure) then the theory is rubbish. Doesn't matter how many agree, how much consensus there is or whatever. Science isn't a democracy, there is no 'consensus' there are theories that are yet to be disproven and those that have been disproven.

That aside, the 97% figure is total rubbish and always has been.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2 ... a84e721157

[pietillidie]

If one scientist disagrees, and has debunked the theories of the "97%" (which is a rubbish figure) then the theory is rubbish. Doesn't matter how many agree, how much consensus there is or whatever. Science isn't a democracy, there is no 'consensus' there are theories that are yet to be disproven and those that have been disproven.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2 ... a84e721157

So, you hold that unanimous agreement is required for a theory to be deemed valid, and that what is proven and unproven, confirmed or debunked, is self-evident and irresistible?

Can you unpack this for us?

[Wokko]

This is what happens to scientists who go against the dogma of climate change. Luckily in this case he seems to be getting compensated, but how many are simply cowed into submission?

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher ... e5IDlPnS74

[Wokko]

[watt price tully]

Now that's a sophisticated argument