Opinion
Featured Image
 Lightspring/Shutterstock

(Daily Sceptic) – For years, the promoters of the spurious “settled science” narrative have claimed that there is a 97-99% consensus among scientists about humans causing climate change. The claim is meaningless since it fails to address differences in the extent of human involvement and how harmful the warming is thought to be.

recently published survey of top-level climate scientists found that just over five in 10 attributed the human contribution to recent climate change to be 75% or above. Only around four in 10 scientists believed that the frequency and severity of extreme weather events had increased significantly in recent years.

Y axis – percentage of “climate change” believed to be caused by humans. X axis – the percentage of scientists polled.

The above graph from the poll is the only realistic way to gauge scientific support for anthropogenic climate change. It is clear that there is not 99% support for humans causing all or most climate change. Of course, it is not a surprise that there is considerable support for the unproven anthropogenic hypothesis (92% believed that a majority of recent warming was due to humans), since sceptical science in this field does not generally attract money, prestige and coveted academic posts.

Emeritus Professor Richard Lindzen recently called the current climate narrative “absurd.” Perhaps, he added, it was the trillions of dollars diverted to green projects and the relentless propaganda from grant-dependent academics and agenda-driven journalists that had persuaded people it is not absurd.

There is a vast amount of money pouring into academia designed to support the hypothesis of anthropogenic climate change. The hope is to shore up the invented 99% ‘consensus’ backed up by helpful, unquestioning media commentators.

READ: How global warming alarmism is being used to promote population control and abortion 

But the new poll shows that even after 25 years of relentless propaganda, there is considerable debate over the subject in scientific circles. Over the last year, the Daily Sceptic has attempted to bring some of this debate to a wider audience.

The survey was conducted in September and October by the North American-based Fairleigh Dickinson University. Great care was taken to collect a representative sample of scientists with at least a bachelor’s degree in fields such as meteorology, climatology, physics, geology and hydrology. Nearly three in five (57%) were members of the American Meteorology Society. Many scientists with degrees in natural science and the social sciences were barred from the group. A full methodology of the poll can be viewed here.

— Article continues below Petition —
Stand with Christian daycare worker fired for refusing to indoctrinate kids with LGBT agenda
  Show Petition Text
7500 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 9000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

A large childcare chain in the United States just fired a faithful Christian caretaker for refusing to read LGBT propaganda to children.

As reported on LifeSiteNews, Bright Horizons Children’s Center in California terminated the contract of Nelli Parisenkova for not reading LGBT-themed books to children as young as 1 year-old.  

Parisenkova, a devout Christian who worked for the company for four years, requested to not read the books because they violated her deeply held religious beliefs.

Instead of tolerating Nelli’s Christian faith, Bright Horizons demanded she 'celebrate diversity' or leave. After refusing to comply with this unjust ultimatum, Parisenkova’s boss expelled her from the building, which forced her to walk 20 minutes in 96-degree heat to the bus stop where she had to wait another 45 minutes.

Parisenkova is now suing Bright Horizons Children’s Center for violating her religious freedom, and she needs your help to raise public awareness about this assault on her human rights.

Sign this petition today to tell Nelli Parisenkova that you stand with her and her Christian faith against the LGBT agenda being pushed by Bright Horizon’s Children’s Center.

Bright Horizons thinks it can bully devout Christians like Nelli into submitting to their leftist ideology. Do not let them get away with it! We all must take a stand to ensure these attacks on our shared Christian faith come to an end. Here are the plain and simple facts:

  • No child should be brainwashed to believe that marriage is between two men or two women.
  • No child should be told that boys can become girls, or that girls can become boys.
  • No child should be indoctrinated with the erroneous belief there are more than two genders, or that people can choose their gender identity.

This is not education. This is propaganda.

Nelli Parisenkova was RIGHT to protect children from LGBT indoctrination and she was RIGHT to invoke her Christian faith in doing so.

SIGN THIS PETITION NOW to tell her she is not alone in this fight!

MORE INFORMATION:  

Daycare center fired employee for refusing to read LGBT propaganda to toddlers: lawsuit

Christian woman fired for resisting LGBT agenda takes on Corporate America: Monday, October 24 

  Hide Petition Text

Much of COP this year is talking about climate “reparations” with “attribution” models said to be able to blame single weather events on long-term human-caused changes in the climate.

This pseudoscientific hocus-pocus can, it seems, even go back to the mid 18th century when James Watt started to ramp up the power of labour-saving steam engines. Over half the poll’s participants (below) thought that global climate change will have “significant harm” on living conditions for humans, but the rest varied from “slight harm” to “slight improvement” and “significant improvement.”

Regular readers will recall that we recently gave publicity to a paper from four leading Italian scientists who undertook a major review of historical climate trends and concluded that declaring a “climate emergency” was not supported by the data. The post was widely distributed on social media and led to the usual huffy ‘fact checks’ and even calls for the work to be banned. Nevertheless, the poll shows clearly that the debate over whether individual weather events are getting worse due to human activity is raging across science.

This is a very interesting result. More poll participants thought the frequency of severe weather events had increased only “slightly,” compared to those who chose “increased significantly.” No change, meanwhile, attracted a 12% vote. Severe weather events were defined as hurricanes, extreme drought, wildfires, etc.

A similar vote split can be seen concerning the severity of recent severe weather events. Of course, the ’highway to hell’ narrative at COP27 does not reflect this scientific split since the highly politicised gathering tends strongly towards the thermogeddon fantasy.

READ: Don’t be fooled by claims of ‘consensus’ on climate change, science is not a popularity contest

According to James Taylor, president of the poll sponsor and U.S. free market think-tank Heartland Institute, the survey “destroys the oft-repeated propaganda that 97% of the world’s scientists believe climate change is a serious problem requiring immediate action.”

U.S. meteorologist Anthony Watts said the poll illustrates that there is less consensus on climate change and a broader scope of differing opinions that we are led to believe. “The results suggest that the draconian solutions such as Net Zero being pushed by the Left, even if they actually worked, are aimed at a non-problem,” he added.

H. Sterling Burnett from Heartland was intrigued that the poll showed older, more experienced scientists were more sceptical of climate disaster claims. “It seems, years of indoctrination have succeeded in brainwashing younger, less experienced climate scientists into believing, data to the contrary, that humans are causing a climate catastrophe,” he concluded.

Reprinted with permission from the Daily Sceptic

Comments

Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.

15 Comments

    Loading...