

Climate Change Confuses Most Americans - tessant
http://www.solarfeeds.com/justmeans/14728-climate-change-confuses-most-americans

======
BerislavLopac
_The two percent of researchers who aren't in agreement deserve to heard. But
they do not deserve equal time in the media. Imagine if you owned 98% of a
business but your less-knowledgeable partner with only two percent had as much
sway as you. It's a ridiculous way to approach business and a ridiculous way
to present such an important issue._

This gets on my nerves -- science is not the same as running a business. I'm
pretty sure that a large part of the said 98% are dogmatically accepting the
view of the majority and are too afraid to test any hypotheses...

~~~
TomOfTTB
I'll admit there is something troubling about surveying only Climatologists in
that they've built an entire industry around Global Warming. If someone could
prove man-made GW didn't exist you'd probably see 2/3 of the available
Climatology grants disappear overnight.

That said I think there's a bigger flaw in this survey and that's the question
itself. The question, as stated in the graph, is "Credibility of Evidence for
Anthropogenic Climate Change". Not "Scientists who believe Climate Change will
cause a cataclysmic change in our environment"

I think everyone agrees that our presence on Earth is having some impact on
the environment. It seems insane not to believe that. The question is to what
extent and that isn't addressed in the survey.

~~~
steve19
I agree. It is like doing a survey on the importance of AI research and only
surveying AI researchers. A much less biased survey would also include CS and
statistics researchers.

------
greenyoda
Scientific truth isn't determined by what percentage of scientists believe in
it -- it's determined by who can show convincing experimental proof to back up
their hypothesis. At the time that Einstein published his theory of
relativity, the overwhelming consensus among physicists was that he was crazy.

Also, no real scientist would find a result convincing if there wasn't enough
information published to allow them to independently verify the experiment.
Using this criterion, 99% of "climate science" is not science.

------
brc
My oh my, without weighing in on the state of climate science or the use of
Word Art for blog images, this line is a real screamer:

"Poll after poll has shown that almost 100% of climate scientists accept the
evidence of climate change and believe we're the main cause"

Let me see : 100% of the people employed in a field agree that the field is
important? Obviously there is so much bias in that I'm surprised anyone would
make such a statement.

Let me restate : 100% of butchers agree that being a vegetarian is not good
for you.

It's interesting, though, the HN crowd rarely gets into arguments over CC/AGW
anymore. I guess it's already been said and there's nothing new.

------
nice1
This is disgusting propaganda written either by morons or by corrupt
individuals who deserve no space on HN. Go Google for Hal Lewis' resignation
letter from the APS if you want a glipse of the truth on these matters.

~~~
greenyoda
I'll second that: definitely go find Lewis' letter and read it.

And if you want a glimpse of some thoughtful scientific discussion of the
other (skeptic) side of global warming, go find the blog "Climate Audit" (and
no, they're not funded by big oil or the Republicans, and I have no connection
with them other than being a reader).

