Another Blow to Consensus

[AEGeneral]

http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/re...te_change.html

FEAR of anthropogenic “global warming” can adversely affect patients’ well-being. Accordingly, the state of the scientific consensus about climate change was studied by a review of the 539 papers on “global climate change” found on the Web of Science database from January 2004 to mid-February 2007, updating research by Oreskes (2004), who had reported that between 1993 and 2003 none of 928 scientific papers on “global climate change” had rejected the consensus that more than half of the warming of the past 50 years was likely to have been anthropogenic. In the present review, 31 papers (6% of the sample) explicitly or implicitly reject the consensus. Though Oreskes said that 75% of the papers in her sample endorsed the consensus, fewer than half now endorse it. Only 6% do so explicitly. Only one paper refers to “catastrophic” climate change, but without offering evidence. There appears to be little evidence in the learned journals to justify the climate-change alarm that now harms patients.

[mcclane]

yep, being constantly innundated by fear mongering on the environmentalists part does make a person wonder if what they are doing is harming the environment or not. I feel the green hippies use guilt more than anything to relay their message in global warming.

for example, they say stop idling your car for no more than 30 seconds to reduce emissions. However, being a car enthusiast and obtaining information from car enthusiasts, it has been noted it is better for your vehicle to warm up your car for 5 min. before taking off. using the CFL example, they say that incandescents use more electrcity thus using more coal to power, true, but they don't point out that CFLs has mercury which is far more poisonous than burning an extra lump of coal will ever be. Again, lack of information or just one sided information from the environmentalists, that to me is a cause of concern already.