Most scientists don’t believe AGW is happening (?)

Nope, sorry, I don’t accept the validity of this statement. There may be protestors within various Institutions; and lists of people who dispute the consensus view on Wikipedia; and lists of unscientific people that do not; but… Wikipedia also contains a great deal of evidence to suggest that the overwhelming majority of scientists of all kinds accept the genuine consensus view that AGW is happening: See Indeed, the above (very long article) includes reference to the fact that more than 97% of published climate scientists take this view: See Furthermore, there is also no EVIDENCE of a massive scientific conspiracy just to keep a few researchers busy. In fact, as George Monbiot has said, “It is hard to convey just how selective you have to be to dismiss the evidence for climate change. You must climb over a mountain of evidence to pick up a crumb: a crumb which then disintegrates in your palm. You must ignore an entire canon of science, the statements of the world’s most eminent scientific institutions, and thousands of papers published in the foremost scientific journals“. See And as James Hoggan has said: “Democracy is utterly dependent upon an electorate that is accurately informed. In promoting climate change denial (and often denying their responsibility for doing so) industry has done more than endanger the environment. It has undermined democracy. There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion. Free speech does not include the right to deceive. Deception is not a point of view. And the right to disagree does not include a right to intentionally subvert the public awareness“. See And finally, as I have said, “There is simply no evidence for your left-wing conspiracy to over-tax and over-regulate people; so as to make everyone poorer. Whereas, there is a great deal of evidence for a right-wing conspiracy to under-tax and under-regulate industry; so as to make a few people richer…” So, will people please stop saying things that are not true? No matter how many times you say such things; it will not stop them being false. But it will prevent concerted, effective action being taken on a global scale to address a truly global problem.


About Rick Altman

Possibly just another 'Climate Cassandra' crying 'Wolf' in cyberspace. However, the moral of the old children's story is that the Wolf eventually turned up!
This entry was posted in Climate Science, Economics, Environment, Hockey Stick Illusion, IPCC, Maketplace of Ideas, Merchants of Doubt, Scepticism and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

10 Responses to Most scientists don’t believe AGW is happening (?)

  1. Donald says:

    “97% of published climate scientists take this view:” … I think that’s about right … an honest answer … but it’s 97% of not very many scientists, is it? How many climate scientists are there? More than 2,000 you think? I think not Is there are big list of scientists who agree with climate warming containing more than 1000 names in it? I had no problem giving you a link with a list of some 30,000 American scientists who deny Global Warming is a reality. And that’s just in one country, the global project exists in all countries, there are tens of thousands of real scientists, from all fields, telling you AGW is not right, all conveniently denied by the press, other media and governments, but as a scientist yourself, do you think these people are any less knowledgeable than climate scientists? And why do thousands of these scientists feel so strongly about this issue that they need to start petitions and so on after every other effort to be heard is rejected by their governments? So ……. If you really believe in Climate Warming, your job, Rick, is not to convince the population but to convince those thousands of scientists who believe AGW is wrong just as strongly as you believe it is right. Just remember … “There is a vast difference between putting forth a point of view, honestly held, and intentionally sowing the seeds of confusion.” Thousands of scientists are trying hard to not seed confusion by remaining cool, calm and detached from taking either side of the equation and concentrating solely on the evidence at hand; evidence most of which climate scientists refuse to publish in an understandable and “Reproducible” manner … which is as science should be. (Me, I don’t give a stuff, my job is to seed confusion and force guys like you to look through the clouds, I think I’m doing a pretty good job of it, considering this blog is referenced from one of my own) 🙂


    • Rick_Altman says:

      As I have said to you over on your blog… How many “scientists” are there in America? Out of a population of 310 million, can we agree that just 10% (I think it is more than that) are scientists? If so, your petition has been signed by 0.1% of them (it is probably less that that). You may have read what I said above, but you have not taken on board its implications… Who is it that is trying so hard to deny this consensus and why? If you had cancer, would you go to a Art Historian to get an accurate prognosis? Why is it that you doubt the experts; and choose to trumpet the views of those who insist the science is not settled (even though they are not studying it)?


      • Nos Lapre says:

        It does not matter, how many “scientists” believe in AGW, but what does matter is, that they do not have the right to force their theories (not facts) on ordinary people, by brainwashing the bureacrats in to introducing ever more taxes and causing huge unemployment, while they enjoy well-paid jobs. Even the I.P.C.C. now has removed the word “AGW” from their publications and only use “climate change” (which has always occurred on our climate long before the “Industrial Revolution) and is a natural occurrence anyhow. The doomsayers have to come with proof and not use computer-modeling. If the doomsayers are so scared for CO2, why then do they still use cars, buses, ships, huge jumbo-jets and enjoy every kind of appliance and gadgets, like fridges, ovens, Mobile Phones, PCs, lap-tops etc. etc. etc. which are all made from mined products? Why do not they use horse and carts, or sailing-boats to travel overseas to the gabfests of climate-change conferences, or even use video-conferencing to avoid polluting the air? They do not practice, what they preach and are therefore hypocrites!. Nos Lapre.


      • Anthropocene Reality says:

        Nice re-hash of just about every contrarian talking point ever invented; and quite concise too. It makes a pleasant change, I must say. Climate change is a ‘Tragedy of the Commons’ problem; one that will only be solved by collective and concerted action by all parties. Unilateral action and/or futile gestures by individuals will get us nowhere. However, it is doing nothing to prevent anthropogenic climate disruption that will send us back to Dark Ages. Mitigation is an investment in the post-Carbon era that is inevitable. Failing to plan for this transition is tantamout to planning to fail. Having said that, I am afraid I cannot be bothered to refute most of your opinions (especially when falsely presented as facts) – or refer you to websites summarising peer-reviewed science – because your position is an unassailable fortress of denial. Like someone who has chosen to believe that the Moon Landings were faked, Princess Diana was murdered by MI6, or that the CIA demolished the WTC, any argument or evidence put forward to demonstrate otherwise is seen as confirmation of the conspiracy (i.e. anticedent false beliefs). Nevertheless, please feel free to read my review of Michael Mann’s ‘The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars’, which I have just posted today. Here is a taste of it:

        Having read both this book and Andrew Montford’s ‘Hockey Stick Illusion’, I should like to propose that, even if you have not done so, you have the following choice: Do you put your trust in an authoritative argument from a genuine expert (Mann) or do you want to believe the conspiracy theory put forward by a non-expert (Montford)? …Put it another way, are you going to believe that climate scientists are over-stating a problem in order to perpetuate the funding of their research; or are you willing to accept that business leaders are down-playing a problem in order to perpetuate the viability of their business?


  2. Donald says:

    This link should interest all those involved in the AGW debate.


    • Rick_Altman says:

      Even if 9,000 people with PhD’s think the moon is made of cheese, that would not make them right; nor mean that I should take any notice of them. Quite a few people with PhD’s think the WTC was brought down by controlled demolition; but that does not mean they are right either. Occam’s Razor applies just as well to AGW as it does to 9/11…. We are back to the marketplace of ideas again, which states that all opinions have equal merit and deserve equal consideration. There is only one problem with this idea; it is wrong. Try this idea instead: “On the balance of probability it is likely that the majority of relevantly qualified experts know what they are talking about!


  3. Donald says:

    2500 … that is roughly the total number of scientists with any form of authority (and who peer-review their own work) saying the world is warming up … the rest are keeping mum about it too afraid to tell the truth in case they get ostracized at work or lose any chance of promotion they might have. It’s a disgrace to the thousands of years spent by science to make true knowledge freely available to one and all.


  4. Rick_Altman says:

    Is that a direct quote from the Conspiracy Theorist’s Handbook, or your own paraphrase of it?


  5. Pingback: Nothing but the truth! « Learning from Dogs

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s