"A meta-study published yesterday looked at over 12,000 peer-reviewed
papers on climate science that appeared in journals between 1991 and
2011. The
papers were evaluated and categorized by how they implicitly or
explicitly endorsed humans as a contributing cause of global warming. The meta-study found that an overwhelming 97.1% of the papers that took a stance endorsed human-cause global warming.
They also asked the 1,200 of the scientists involved in the research to
self-evaluate their own studies, with nearly identical results. In the
interest of transparency, the meta-study results were published in an open access journal, and the researchers set up a website so that anybody can check their results.
From the article: '... a memo from communications strategist Frank
Luntz leaked in 2002 advised Republicans, "Should the public come to
believe that the scientific issues are settled, their views about global
warming will change accordingly. Therefore, you need to continue to
make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate."
This campaign has been successful. A 2012 poll from U.S. Pew Research
Center found less than half of Americans thought scientists agreed
humans were causing global warming. The media has assisted in this
public misconception, with most climate stories "balanced" with a
"skeptic" perspective. However, this results in making the 2–3% seem
like 50%. In trying to achieve "balance," the media has actually created
a very unbalanced perception of reality. As a result, people believe
scientists are still split about what's causing global warming, and
therefore there is not nearly enough public support or motivation to
solve the problem.'"
I can solve the problem, a no brainer, STOP the chemtrailers!
On another note
No comments:
Post a Comment