Global Warming Consensus?
By mattithyahu
@mattithyahu (389)
United States
May 18, 2007 3:40am CST
I am going to say it: I am a skeptic when it comes to man's contribution to global warming.
Firstly let me say that it is extremely unpopular for people to even suggest that global warming isn't happening or that man's contribution to global warming is negligible. I find this interesting.
My point of this post though is to look at the word "consensus." Consensus is defined as "An opinion or position reached by a group as a whole" or "General agreement or accord."
Please not that it does not say "proof" or "conclusive evidence" or "only possibility." Saying there is a scientific consensus generally only comes up in politics. If something had enough evidence to be considered proved or a scientific theory, there would not need to be a consensus. Consensus is only used when there is not enough evidence either way so you get a group together (often not balanced) to put fourth a position.
Have you ever heard ANY scientist talk about the consensus of gravity or of Newton's laws? No, because they don't need consensus, they are fully fledged scientific theories that can stand on their own, regardless of what a group of people (even scientists) might think.
What are your thoughts on "consensus"?
Cheers,
Matt
http://www.mattjonesblog.com
2 people like this
4 responses
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
18 May 07
A consensus is nothing more than an agreement by a group of people.
I like that your definitions included the word "opinion"
Anyone can have an opinion on anything but that does not make the opinion factual, even if a whole bunch of people decide to agree on that opinion.
Opinions are not facts, only ideas and theories.
Theories have to be proven before they become facts.
On top of that idea, the consensus in the case of Global Warming was that man "might" be responsible for it.
Might be responsible?...what does that mean, either he is or he isn't responsible.
This opens a whole new door of doubt in addition to just having an opinion.
Yet on the basis of this nonsense...Global Warming advocates expect entire countries to undertake massive changes to combat a problem that in these scientist's OPINION man MIGHT BE responsible for.
What if these scientists are wrong?
In my opinion there is insufficient proof to warrant the amount of hype and demanded actions that is presently surrounding this issue.
2 people like this
@trinidadvelasco (11401)
• Philippines
19 May 07
i can hardly believe it that there are still some who are not convinced on the urgency of global warming issues to be addressed in full force. all the signs are already there. the depleting of the ozone layer, the melting of the ice caps, the submerging of some islands which used to have housed some inhabitants, the climate going crazy, the weather getting unpredictable...many more. well, it is all up to those who still do not believe what to do with their lives. we have to respect their views.
@Destiny007 (5805)
• United States
19 May 07
Global Warming is a fact of nature, and not an act of man.
Man cannot control nature, man is controlled by nature.
No matter what man does to try and prevent Global Warming it is still going to happen.
The Kyoto Accord and the provisions set out under that plan have already been determined that if everyone does follow that plan it will only result in about a 2% drop in greenhouse gasses.
A 2% reduction of these gasses are not going to have any measurable affect on Global Warming.
The Global Warming issue is something that has been over hyped and is driven by special interests groups and political groups who want to benefit from the increased taxes and fees that would be generated.
Global Warming is going to happen, and there is nothing anyone can do about it.
Man has very little effect.
1 person likes this
@mattithyahu (389)
• United States
22 May 07
"In my opinion there is insufficient proof to warrant the amount of hype and demanded actions that is presently surrounding this issue."
Exactly! Of course I think that people should take care of the environment the best they cay, but to just blindly follow the global warming fear mongers is just silly and would be a complete waste of resources and effort.
"all the signs are already there." trinidadvelasco, unfortunately that isn't the case. Firstly, the things you pointed out aren't even necessarily happening they way you think they are (if at all) and secondly, even if they are, it is not at all clear that it is man's doing.
@trinidadvelasco (11401)
• Philippines
19 May 07
a consensus is the general perception of man as to how things are. well, as for global warming, those who do not believe in it, will do when its pangs will be striking real hard already. by then, no one can do anything about it, but everyone will the be believing in it...by then. this is for all of those who have the wait and see attitude. see for yourself when it is too late.
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
19 May 07
Have you read the IPCC report summary? Run any analysis on the earth temperature data? Checked out web sites with both view points? Ever seen a chart of earth temperatures going back through geological time? Ever taken a course in advanced statistics? Ever taken a graduate course in experimental design of scientific experiments?
As it happens I have done all the things mentioned in the first paragraph, as well as having watched Al Gore's film twice.
So, when I tell you global warming is a natural phenomona about which we can do almost nothing, it is an informed opinion. Yes, I said "opionion". No one can absolutely prove this issue one way or the other.
However, there is a very high probability of it being natural and a very low probability of it being man made.
1 person likes this
@mattithyahu (389)
• United States
22 May 07
Yeah, it is a "general perception," it isn't scientific fact, it isn't even a scientific theory. There is no reason to base public policy on general perception.
Good response redyellowblackdog. :)
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
19 May 07
Here's a multiple choice test for man made global warming "believers".
Which of the following is a possible course of action for mankind?
a) Change that there are 24 hours in a day.
b) Cause the sun to rise in the west.
c) Change that there are 365 1/4 days in a year.
d) Cause the sun to set in the east.
e) Change that ice ages are followed by global warming.
f) NONE OF THE ABOVE
1 person likes this
@lisaneuc (56)
• United States
24 May 07
I've gotten to the point where I am now skeptical almost anytime I hear the word "consensus." It is indeed the word of politicians and not the word of scientists.
Also, it should be rendered invalid anytime a single individual can disprove it.
Particularly as it involves global warming, I think it is funny how people are insisting that there is a consensus and yet working so hard to keep people from expressing an opposing view...which would kind of call into question the whole idea that there was some sort of monolithic consensus in the first place.
Good post, matt
