On Sunday, April 21, 2013 2:25:54 PM UTC+1, Ian Bingham wrote:
"Dawlish" wrote in message

...



On Sunday, April 21, 2013 12:14:58 PM UTC+1, Ian Bingham wrote:

"Alastair McDonald" wrote in message ....







There is a video here where a climate scientist gives his views of the



state we are in with regards to global warming.



http://vimeo.com/43012713



Of course, those who should watch it won't :-(







Cheers, Alastair.







On the other hand, read "Climate: The Counter Consensus" by Prof. Robert



M.Carter, an erudite work which comes to some rather different

conclusions.



I believe it is reviewed by readers on Amazon. With the experts so much

at



variance I think one has to keep a strictly open mind on this vexed

topic.



It doesn't even seem to be decided whether increased CO2 causes global



warming or whether it is the other way round.







Ian Bingham,



Inchmarlo, Aberdeenshire.



"Experts are certainly not "at variance" and that's a book written from a

particular perspective and certainly not a peer-reviewed study. Your

comments are a *very* poor reflection on the consensus.



This paper, Doran and Zimmermann 2009 will help you to see that. It also

mentions Oreskes 2004 and the scientific consensus appears to have hardened

markedly since then:



http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...09EO030002/pdf



In addition, a recent, huge, review of scientific literature, by Powell

(Dec 2012) showed almost 14,000 papers agreeing with the consensus and only

24 that didn't. Powell concluded this (not peer reviewed, AFAIK, but an

enormous sample):



What can we conclude from this study?



1. In the scientific literature, there is virtually no disagreement that

humans are causing global warming.



Please counter those studies, if you want to advocate that scientists don't

agree on this. You'll struggle. They do. A tiny minority, including Prof

Bob Carter, don't.





Dawlish, how can you deny that scientists are at variance on global warming?

If the science was so clear and unequivocal and the findings of scientists

so unanimous, there wouldn’t be all the controversy that there is; no-one

would dare to be a denier under those circumstances. Although, speaking for

myself, and I suspect many others, when I see any sort of bandwagon, I am

instinctively suspicious because I’ve noticed that there is a certain type

of person who loves to have a self-righteous stick to beat the rest of us

with, the modern equivalent of the old hell-fire preacher. I’ll continue to

read as widely as I have time for and keep an open mind.



Ian Bingham,

Inchmarlo, Aberdeenshire.

I didn't say they aren't at variance. I painted a very clear picture of just how big the consensus is from 2 studies and it looks like you don't like that. Did you read the studies? If you have evidence to the contrary, Show it instead of waving your arms about a lot and talking about "bandwagons" and self-righteous sticks (whatever they are).

PS Every scientist has an open mind. It's just that the incredibly vast majority don't keep it so open that they fall into it and they recognise the enormous consensus in favour of Co2 being the main driver of the current warming.