What Consensus?

How many times you have heard that climate science is settled and humanity is responsible for our disastrous climate change that will fry or maybe freeze all of mankind? What if you were told that maybe that there is no consensus?

When geoscientists and engineers were surveyed, only 36% of them believed in humans causing climate change. That is hardly a consensus. The real truth is that the science supporting catastrophic anthropogenic global change has been collapsing with every passing day as many of their conclusions have been proven either to be false or the computer models they depend upon have failed to accurately predict the climate we are presently experiencing.

The only consensus that exists is that we are witnessing a warming trend from the depth of the Little Ice Age and that we had similar warming and cooling over the past billions of years. Nor is this all. The Congressional-funded National Environmental Education Foundation surveys meteorologists, and guess what? Only 24% of meteorologists believe that most of climate change was human induced, and only 19% agree that global climate models are reliable for future projection climate warming and for predicating increase raining season and drought.

Joe D’ Aleo, the first director of Meteorology at the Weather channel, stated, “AMS has tried very hard to brainwash broadcast meteorologists by forcing them to attend conferences and teleconferences with one-sided presentations where global warming evangelism is preached. Broadcasters send me notifications they get from AMS telling them they must attend these.” He added that conferences often present one-sided views that man is responsible for climate change, and yet, many meteorologists have rejected this one-sided science.

The latter should be disturbing since much of the science is disputed, but many scientists and meteorologists find their job paths could be blocked if they disagree with the conventional wisdom. Forbes writer, James Taylor, noted, “In contrast to the AMS survey, where all respondents are AMS meteorologists, a majority have Ph.D.’s and fully 80% have a Ph.D. or Master’s Degree, position statements by organizational bureaucracies carry little scientific weight. For example, a position statement recently published by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) and frequently cited as the 'definitive' indication of scientific consensus on global warming was authored by a mere 23 persons. Of those 23 persons, only five had Ph.D.’s in a field closely related to climate science, an equal number (5) were staffers for environmental activist groups, two were politicians, one was the EPA general counsel under the Clinton administration and 19 of the 23 had already spoken out on behalf of global warming alarmism prior to being chosen for the panel. Clearly the scientific weight of the NAS statement pales in comparison to the AMS meteorologist survey.” So much of the consensus that the media quotes is based on questionable surveys designed to create the false impression that there is no scientific debate.