97% Lie

Summary

The script argues against the notion of 97% scientific consensus on human-caused climate change. It contends this statistic derives from a flawed study, as only 1.6% of analyzed papers explicitly state humans cause over 50% of warming. The script maintains climate has always changed, irrespective of humans. It holds there has only been gradual warming since 1850, not the drastic rise activists warn of, and no increase in extreme weather events. It concludes most scientists agree warming is occurring, but there is incredible diversity of opinions on its causes and solutions, contrary to claims of overwhelming consensus.

Takeaways

• 🌍 The claim that 97% of scientists agree humans are the main cause of climate change is contested, with an assertion that only 1.6% agree.
• 🔍 A critique of John Cook's study is presented, suggesting it misrepresented scientific consensus on climate change by aggregating different categories of agreement.
• 📊 According to the critique, Cook's analysis involved a statistical manipulation that excluded a significant portion of studies, inflating the consensus to 97%.
• 📚 The script argues that a majority of the papers Cook analyzed did not explicitly comment on mankind's role in climate change.
• 🔬 It's suggested that only a small fraction of the studies explicitly support the view that human activity is a major contributor to global warming.
• 🌡️ The narrative acknowledges a slow, marginal warming trend since the 1850s but disputes the extent of human responsibility.
• 📉 The script challenges the notion of a dramatic increase in extreme weather events, claiming there is no significant rise in hurricanes, floods, or forest fires attributable to climate change.
• 🐾 Claims about a dangerous shortage of polar bears and other climate-related catastrophes are contested.
• 🌳 Historical climate variability is highlighted, with references to colder periods in the Early Middle Ages and warmer periods when vineyards thrived in Scotland.
• ❄️ The Little Ice Age is mentioned to argue that climate has always changed independently of human activities.

Q & A

What percentage of scientists did the tweet by Barack Obama claim agree that climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous?

Barack Obama's tweet claimed that 97% of scientists agree climate change is real, man-made, and dangerous.

Who published the paper in 2013 that aimed to demonstrate an overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change?

The paper was published in 2013 by John Cook, a controversial environmental activist who runs the alarmist website Skeptical Science.

What statistical trick did John Cook use regarding the papers that did not comment on man's role in climate change?

John Cook applied a statistical trick by leaving out the 67% of papers that did not comment on man's role in climate change. This caused the percentage of papers supporting man-made climate change to increase from 33% to 97%.

What percentage of studies actually supported the conclusion that mankind is responsible for a significant aspect of climate change?

Only 1.6% of the studies analyzed supported the conclusion that mankind is responsible for a significant aspect of climate change.

What evidence does the script provide against the claim that extreme weather events have increased due to climate change?

The script states there has been no increase in hurricanes, floods, or other forms of extreme weather events that could be attributed to climate change.

What natural climate variations over history are mentioned as evidence against man-made climate change?

The early Middle Ages being much colder than now, the medieval warm period when vineyards existed in Scotland, and the Little Ice Age from the 16th-17th centuries are mentioned as evidence of natural climate variation.

What trend in global temperatures does the script state exists since the 1850s?

The script states there has been a slow, marginal warming trend in global temperatures since the 1850s.

Why does the script argue it is illogical that 97% of scientists would agree man is mainly responsible for climate change?

Because the climate has always changed due to natural causes, irrespective of and independent from human activity.

What is the main conclusion regarding the claimed 97% consensus among scientists on climate change?

The claim that 97% of scientists agree man is mainly responsible for climate change is nonsense. At most, only 1.6% of studies supported that conclusion.

What does the script recommend regarding climate change policy?

The script states there is no need to panic and implies no drastic policy changes are warranted to address climate change.

Outlines

00:00

😠The Myth of '97% of Scientists Agree' on Climate Change

This paragraph debunks the claim that 97% of scientists agree that climate change is man-made and dangerous. It analyzes a flawed study by John Cook that manipulated categories to create the illusion of consensus. It shows that actually only 1.6% of studies explicitly state humans cause over 50% of climate change.

05:10

😌Climate Has Always Changed, No Need to Panic

This paragraph explains that climate has naturally fluctuated throughout history, with eras of warmth and cold long before human influence. The recent warming since 1850 has been gradual, with no increase in extreme weather events. So there is no justification for panic or alarmism.

Keywords

💡97% consensus

The idea that 97% of scientists agree that human activity is causing dangerous climate change. The video argues this is a myth, citing a flawed study by John Cook that misrepresented categories of papers to create the illusion of overwhelming consensus. In reality, only 1.6% explicitly endorsed humans as the main cause.

💡climate change

The video acknowledges a gradual warming trend since 1850, but disputes the notion that this is primarily driven by human factors or that it will necessarily lead to catastrophic impacts. It notes climate has always changed naturally throughout history.

💡CO2 emissions

Carbon dioxide released from human activities like burning fossil fuels. While 75% of papers show CO2 has a warming effect, the video argues there is no 97% consensus linking human CO2 emissions to the majority of observed climate changes.

💡environmental activists

The video cites John Cook's website, Skeptical Science, as being run by an environmental activist with an agenda to promote climate alarmism. This casts doubt on the impartiality of his study findings.

💡medieval warming

A past period of natural climate change demonstrating temperatures shift irrespective of human impacts. Vineyards thrived in medieval Scotland, contrasting with ice sheets there today.

💡natural climate change

The climate has always changed naturally due to factors outside human control. The video argues recent changes are also within this natural variation rather than driven by human-caused global warming.

💡no increase in extreme weather

Contrary to climate change warnings, the video states there has been no observed increase in hurricanes, floods or other extreme weather events. This further disputes notions of a human-induced climate emergency.

💡polar bears

Iconic species said to be threatened by climate change melting Arctic ice. But the video says there is no dangerous shortage, undermining this common narrative.

💡small ice age

A past period of significant natural cooling demonstrating historical climate volatility, undermining notions that stable pre-industrial climate was disrupted by human CO2 emissions.

💡statistical trick

How John Cook created the illusion of 97% consensus by leaving out 67% of papers not stating a position and inflating the importance of explicitly endorsements. Exposes flawed methodology.

Highlights

The 97% consensus on human-caused climate change is a false, blatant lie

In reality only 1.6% of scientists explicitly agree humans cause over 50% of climate change

John Cook's paper used flawed methods, misrepresenting categories to claim 97% consensus

Majority of papers simply state CO2 causes warming, not that humans drive over 50% of climate change

Climate has always changed, irrespective of human activity

Global temperatures have only slowly risen since 1850, not dangerously as activists claim

There has been no increase in extreme weather events

Droughts, fires have always existed; no need to panic over climate change

Early Middle Ages were much colder than now

Medieval Warm Period supported vineyards in Scotland, now under ice

16th-17th century Little Ice Age enabled walking on the Thames river

Polar bears are not endangered from climate change

Most scientists don't believe humans cause over 50% of warming

The climate has always changed naturally throughout history

No need to panic over gradual warming since 1850s

Transcripts

[Music] how often don't we hear that 97%  of scientists agree that humans are the  

cause of climate change that this climate  change is severe posing a great threat  

to our planet and that we need a drastic  reduction in our carbon dioxide emissions

all of this and I mean all of it is false it's a  blatant lie that 97% of scientists agree with it  

in reality only 1.6% of scientists agree with  the above statements and there's an incredible  

diversity among climatologists geologists chemists  Physicians and so on about the nature and causes  

of possible changes in the global climate and  an even greater diversity among energy experts  

kinlist and the like about the best way to move  forward from where we are now we will come to  

talk about the rational response to the Lively and  fascinating debate about planetary equilibria but  

first let us have a look at the 97 myth itself  this myth gained Global traction with a tweet by  

Barack Obama on May 16th 20 2013 he posted and  I quote 97% of scientists agree climate change  

is real man-made and dangerous with this very  tweet Obama referred to a paper published the  

same year by a man called John Cook John Cook is  a controversial environmental activist who runs  

the alarmist website skeptical science in this  paper he aimed to demonstrate an overwhelming  

scientific consensus with the obvious intention  of strengthening the environmentalist cause to  

do so he analyzed 12,000 articles published in  learned journals containing the words global  

warming or climate change then he subdivided  these articles into seven different categories  

the first category contained papers which  explicitly stated that GL warming exists  

and that it is at least 50% man-made the second  category contained papers which simply stated man  

has a role in global warming but they did not  in any way quantify that role the third that  

an increase in CO2 in general has a warming  effect the fourth category was papers which  

did not comment on the role of mankind at all  or which maintained that it is unclear whether  

man has a role in climate change or not in the  fifth category John Cook placed the papers which  

suggested mankind has a minimal impact on global  warming the sixth category then was the papers  

which stated mankind probably does not have  any effect at all on global warming and the  

seventh category finally explicitly argued that  man has less than 50% impact on on the global  

climate John Cook took the results from the  first second and third categories and brought  

them all together into one group the pr group  this amounted to 33% of all papers but the vast  

majority of papers 67% belonged to category  4 papers that did not comment on man's role  

in global warming to this group cook applied a  statistical trick or rather he simply left these  

studies out of the equation altogether causing  the pr group to increase from 33% to 97% this  

is how the myth of 97% scientific consensus was  born but it gets worse in John Cook's study the  

exact percentages for the separate categories  are structurally omitted but they are only  

taken together as one Collective group and this  creates the illusion that all of these scientists  

agree about man's role in global warming but  in reality the categories one and two deal  

with man's influence but Category 3 only deals  with the effects of CO2 if you look at Cook's  

underlying data and split up the categories  you will see that the vast majority of studies  

75% only supported the idea that CO2 in general  has an effect on the climate only 1.6% support  

the conclusion that mankind is responsible for a  significant aspect of climate change not 97% but

1.6% so most scientists agree that there seems to  have been a slow marginal warming Trend since the  

1850s but the idea that 97% of scientists would  agree that man is mainly responsible for this  

is utter nonsense and this is completely logical  too because the climate has as we all know always  

changed irrespective of and independent from  man's activities in the Early Middle Ages it  

was a lot colder than it is now this period was  followed by the era of medieval warmth in which  

Vineyards were cultivated in Scotland and Lively  settlements full of activities existed in places  

that are now buried by hundreds of meters of  ice a small Ice Age followed with its Heyday in  

the 16th and 17th centuries when an elephant  could walk on the temps and when we painted  

these well-known Winters views in the Frozen  Netherlands since 1850 then global temperatures  

have slowly started to rise again very gradually  the huge increase in the rise of temperature of  

which activists have warned simply does not  exist there's been no increase in hurricanes  

floods or other forms of extreme weather nor  is there a dangerous shortage of polar bears  

drought and forest fires have existed existed  throughout the ages and will continue to do  

so so there's no need to panic whatsoever  unfortunately most scientists agree with

[Music] this [Music]

[Music]