The consensus on the consensus
eBook (PDF), 141 Pages
The major objective of this study is to collect and assess information about the opinions and attitudes of professionals within the field of geosciences (earth sciences) regarding global climate change, and the climate "consensus" debate, as well as to understand the rationale the participants use when forming their opinions by directly surveying a large number of earth scientists. In particular, this study endeavors improve on past survey attempts and provide a more rigorous dataset from which to draw conclusions on the global climate change debate. Once survey data had been collected, the responses of various participant groups were analyzed and compared with other participant groups, as well as similar responses from the general U.S. public. This master’s thesis presents the results of the survey in an effort to advance the understanding of the global climate debate among scientists. Originally published by the University of Illinois at Chicago.
Available in PDF Format
Ratings & ReviewsLog in to review this item
2 People Reviewed This Product
Apr 17, 2016Perhaps barring my years in elementary school I have never come across a study so very simplistic and biased in the entirety of it's approach. Amazingly though, the process this study used to reach it's results, which were obviously predetermined, goes even further to remove even the slightest credibility it hoped to have. This entire waste of time being called a study does more to prove non-consensus than anything else. Supposing you're able to overlook the fact that the entire survey is made up of essentially 2 questions, you'll be quite shocked when reading the results. Hoping to seem relevant they begin with a survey size of roughly 10,000 scientists. This is all wonderful until you look into how a consensus claim was reached. OF THE 10,000+ SCIENTISTS SURVEYED FOR THE STUDY, THE FINAL RESULT USES 77 SCIENTISTS. THAT IS, THE RESULTS PURPORTED AS BEING SOMEHOW OFFICIAL AND SCIENTIFIC ONLY USE 0.7% (THAT'S ZERO-POINT-SEVEN PERCENT OF THE WHOLE SURVEY SIZE. THIS MEANS THAT ALMOST... More > 100% OF THE SCIENTISTS SURVEYED WERE EXCLUDED FOR REASONS I AM QUITE SURE YOU CAN BY THIS TIME ACCURATELY GUESS!< Less
Nov 19, 2013This is "junk science." The purpose of this survey was to generate a result that could be cited as evidence of a "consensus" of experts for dangerous anthropogenic warming. To achieve that goal, Zimmerman wrote a survey that asked essentially meaningless questions. They didn't ask, in President Obama's words, whether "climate change is real, man-made and dangerous?" They didn't ask anything like that. They didn't ask any questions at all that directly addressed any real issue in the climate change debate. Instead they asked just two questions about climate: Q1: "When compared with pre-1800s levels, do you think that mean global temperatures have generally risen, fallen, or remained relatively constant?" Q2: "Do you think human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures?" Q1 is worthless for distinguishing climate alarmists from climate skeptics. "Pre-1800s" was the middle of the Little... More > Ice Age, and it is obviously warmer now than it was then. But nearly all of the human contribution to atmospheric GHG levels has occurred since the 1940s, so this question has nothing to do with anthropogenic climate change. Even most prominent climate change skeptics would answer "risen" to this question. Q2 is just as bad. Since aerosols from smoke clearly cause cooling (a fact which was one of the main causes for the 1970s ice age scare), few people would doubt that human activity can change temperatures, so even most of those who doubt that anthropogenic CO2 and CH4 cause worrisome global warming would have to answer "yes" to Q2. Zimmerman could have asked a meaningful answer about anthropogenic climate change, but chose not to do so. If you want to know what the experts REALLY think about climate change, don't bother with this biased survey. Fortunately, there are better sources. Back in 2007, when Harris polled 500 leading American Meteorological and Geophysical scientists, there was no consensus -- and that was before Climategate revealed widespread scientific malpractice among leading climate alarmists! Harris found that: "97% agree that 'global average temperatures have increased' during the past century. But not everyone attributes that rise to human activity. A slight majority (52%) believe this warming was human-induced, 30% see it as the result of natural temperature fluctuations and the rest are unsure."< Less
There are no reviews for previous versions of this product
- Margaret R K Zimmerman (Standard Copyright License)
- September 28, 2011
- File Format
- File Size
- 1.2 MB
Formats for this Ebook
|Required Software||Any PDF Reader, Apple Preview|
|Supported Devices||Windows PC/PocketPC, Mac OS, Linux OS, Apple iPhone/iPod Touch... (See More)|
|# of Devices||Unlimited|
|Flowing Text / Pages||Pages|
|Learn more about ebook formats and e-readers|
Your notification has been sent
Lulu Staff has been notified of a possible violation of the terms of our Membership Agreement. Our agents will determine if the content reported is inappropriate or not based on the guidelines provided and will then take action where needed.
Thank you for notifying us. We will email you with the results and/or actions taken as a result of the investigation if you chose to receive confirmation.
We were unable to complete your request.
We were unable to complete your request.
The page you are attempting to access contains content that is not intended for underage readers.
Please verify your birth date to continue.