The In depth Story Behind a Climate Fraud

Summary

This video script critically examines the oft-cited claim that 97% of scientists agree on human-caused climate change being a serious crisis. It meticulously dissects various studies purported to support this consensus, revealing how their findings have been misrepresented or diluted. The script highlights that while there is widespread agreement on basic climate science principles, the alleged 97% consensus on climate change being a dangerous, man-made crisis is a fallacy. It argues that the consensus narrative has been weaponized to stifle scientific debate and marginalize dissenting voices, contrary to the principles of open inquiry.

Takeaways

• 🌡️ The claim that 97% of scientists agree on man-made climate change being a dangerous crisis is misleading and not supported by the actual studies cited.
• 📊 Many studies cited for the 97% consensus only found agreement on basic facts like CO2 being a greenhouse gas and human activities impacting climate, but not on the extent of human causation or the urgency of the issue.
• 🔬 Among surveys of climate scientists and experts specifically, the percentage agreeing humans are the primary cause of global warming is much lower than 97%.
• 🤥 Statements claiming consensus from scientific organizations often did not accurately represent the views of their members through proper surveys.
• ⚖️ The push for consensus discourages legitimate scientific debate and dissent on unsettled aspects of climate change.
• 📈 There is widespread agreement on basic climate science facts, but disagreement and uncertainty remain on the magnitude of human impact, future projections, and appropriate policy responses.
• 🏆 Scientific conclusions should be based on evidence and rigorous arguments, not appeals to constructed consensus narratives.
• 🚫 The 97% consensus claim is often exaggerated and misrepresented by politicians, activists, and media to portray unanimous expert agreement on climate change being a human-caused crisis.
• 💰 There are potential personal and professional costs for climate scientists who challenge the prevailing narrative of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming.
• 🤷‍♂️ Overall, the video script argues that the 97% consensus claim is an overstated statistic not accurately reflecting the diversity of views among scientists on key aspects of the climate change debate.

Q & A

What is the 97% consensus claim about?

The claim is that 97% of the world's scientists agree that climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.

How did the 97% consensus claim originate?

The claim seems to have originated from a 2004 study by Naomi Oreskes, which found that 75% of scientific articles endorsed the idea that human activities were affecting the Earth's climate. However, this finding was later misrepresented by Al Gore in his film 'An Inconvenient Truth' as a consensus that climate change is a serious problem caused by humans.

What did the 2009 University of Illinois survey find?

The survey found that 90% of respondents agreed that global temperatures had risen since the pre-1800s, while only 82% agreed that human activity was a significant contributing factor. Among meteorologists, only 64% agreed that human activity was a significant factor.

What were the findings of the 2013 John Cook study?

The study claimed to have examined 12,000 scientific papers and found that 97% endorsed the consensus that greenhouse gases were at least partly responsible for global warming. However, the study set a very low bar, and only 1 in 200 papers actually claimed that humans caused most of the observed global warming.

What did the 2012 American Meteorological Society survey reveal?

The survey found that only 52% of respondents believed that global warming over the 20th century had happened and was mostly man-made. The remaining 48% either thought it was mostly natural, didn't think it happened, or were unsure.

Why is the 97% consensus claim considered problematic?

The claim is considered problematic because it oversimplifies and misrepresents the actual survey data, which shows much less agreement on the specifics of climate change being a man-made and urgent crisis. The claim is often used to stifle scientific debate and dissenting views.

What does the script suggest about the statements from scientific societies supporting the consensus?

The script suggests that the statements from scientific societies supporting the consensus were not based on surveys of their members but were instead issued by a small number of activists using committee positions to make it appear as though their views were shared by all members.

What does the script argue is the real problem regarding the 97% consensus claim?

The script argues that the real problem is not the lack of consensus, but the dishonest bullying campaign to stifle scientific debate by misrepresenting the level of agreement and attacking dissenting views.

What does the script suggest about the consequences of dissenting from the prevailing narrative on human-caused warming?

The script suggests that scientists who contest the prevailing narrative on human-caused warming or produce smaller estimates of its impact are likely to end up on a McCarthyite blacklist of 'deniers' and face personal and professional costs, including abuse and harassment.

What is the script's overall message regarding the 97% consensus claim?

The script's overall message is that the 97% consensus claim is a misrepresentation of the actual survey data and is being used as a tool to suppress scientific debate and dissenting views on climate change, rather than promoting an honest and open discussion based on evidence and quality arguments.