CLIMATE CHANGE: WHAT THE EXPERTS REALLY THINK
We are often told that experts disagree about whether climate change is really happening. We are also told that there is disagreement as to whether climate change is man-made.
It is obviously very important to know how much agreement or disagreement there is. So in 2004 scientists checked the 928 scientific papers on global climate change published between 1993 and 2003. They found that none of them rejected human–caused global warming.
Recently a survey looked at scientific papers from 1991 to 2011 by scientists active in climate science and fields related to climate science. Over 4000 articles stating the reality or otherwise of man-made climate change were found. Over 97% of articles agreed the reality of human-caused global warming. The most sceptical group of scientists were economic geologists. (Economic geologists are concerned with earth materials and minerals that can be used for economic and/or industrial purposes including oil, coal, and metals)
Nearly every reputable, relevant, scientific organisation in the world, including the National Academies of Science from 33 different countries, has issued statements confirming human-caused global warming. The most authoritative and independent source of information, the IPCC, says that the likelihood that global warming exists and is human-caused is graded as ‘extremely likely'. This means more than 95% likely.
Where does the idea that there is not agreement among experts come from? Certainly there are vested interests. The oil industry has spent huge sums in promoting the idea that human-based climate change is not real and have sought the support of scientists who are not climate scientists to back up this lie.
97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is man-made and real.
Those that suggest otherwise bear a heavy responsibility if their misinformation delays us, our governments, and others from taking the necessary actions to fight climate change and protect our world.
Main source: John Cook. See Website: SkepticalScience