How many scientists believe?

Question

Is there any reliable study that shows how many scientists believe in global warming? I've heard some people who believe in global warming say that all scientists believe in it. And I've heard some people who don't believe in global warming say that most scientists don't believe in it. I'm not looking for propaganda. Are there any studies that are accepted by both sides?

Answer 1

As far as I know, only one GW skeptic has done a bibliography of peer-reviewed works supporting that view: Madhav Khandekar has a list of 68 peer-reviewed papers that question some aspect of the existing scientific consensus.

For a sense of scale, the latest IPCC report has over 4,500 references.

Answer 2

Yes There Are TWO Sides,

But Only One Is Heard All Over The New...
(The Ones Who Think Global Warming IS Real)
And Only One Group Has Been Threatened With Death!
(The Ones Who Think Global Warming ISN'T Real)

Here Are Somethings That Say Global Warming Is NOT Real...

http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/450392,CST-EDT-REF30b.article

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSo2VSsDqsk

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?BRD=1211&dept_id=169695&newsid=18269748&PAG=461&rfi=9

Honestly...
I Think Global Warming Is A Clever Little Scam...To Add Another Tax, And Steal Some Money From The People Who Work Hard,
Like There Actually Considering Putting A Carbon Tax... (What A Joke)
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/07/washington/07carbon.html?ei=5090&en=2360b6693500bdb8&ex=1341460800&adxnnl=1&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss&pagewanted=print&adxnnlx=1184513426-Iy+NKjeWPhX2pzGhjvqnSg

Really Are Money Could Be So Much Better Spent, Maybe On Oh I Don't Know... Aids, Cancer, Hurricane Relief, Stuff That We Know Actually Excises And Is Being Put To Good Use, Just A Though

Just Remember, Just 'cause you heard it from some rock star, or politician, that does not make it true!

Hope It Helps

Answer 3

Define "scientists" and "believe" and I'll get right on it.

Most of the data was crunched by the CIAS supercomputer and the computers at the Hadley Center in the UK as well as at universities, government facilities and private labs around the world. It has been checked and rechecked and projections have been compared to reality.

If you take the Naomi Oreskes study which says 75% agree, and combine it with the IPCC force factor analysis which shows that the largest force factor is man made green house gasses and has a 10% error bar associated with it, you can come up with the statement:

"75% of all 'scientists' are 90% sure that Global Warming is due to greenhouse gasses caused by human activity."

Best I can do for you on such short notice.

Answer 4

The consensus was quantified in a Science study by Prof. Naomi Oreskes (Dec. 2004) in which she surveyed 928 scientific journal articles that matched the search [global climate change] at the ISI Web of Science. Of these, according to Oreskes, 75% agreed with the consensus view (either implicitly or explicitly), 25% took no stand one way or the other, and none rejected the consensus.

http://www.norvig.com/oreskes.html

This one's not a study, but...

Dr. Lockwood: "The evidence, quite honestly, among the scientific community that recent warming is predominantly driven by greenhouse gases is actually overwhelming. There's more debate in the public arena. The impression is often given there is a big scientific debate going on between scientists but I'm afraid it's not, it's a major consensus of greenhouse gas and a few mavericks on the outside. But mavericks are good, scepticism is fine. Somebody said about the program you're talking about, 'Scepticism is fine falsification is a completely different thing'."

Falsification refers to 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2007/1974497.htm#transcript

Another interesting transcript:

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/scienceshow/stories/2007/1977876.htm#transcript

List of and statements by concurring organizations vs. the one dissenting organization (American Association of Petroleum Geologists)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change

The bottom line is that most scientists agree with the consensus that humans are the primary cause of the current global warming. There are a few skeptics, but not many.

Answer 5

The vast majority of scientists agree that global warming is real and mostly man made. Indisputable proof:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_change
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/306/5702/1686

"The fact that the community overwhelmingly supports the consensus is evidenced by picking up any copy of Journal of Climate or similar, any scientific program at the meetings, or simply going to talk to scientists. I challenge you, if you think there is some un-reported division, show me the hundreds of abstracts that support your view - you won't be able to. You can argue whether the consensus is correct, or what it really implies, but you can't credibly argue it doesn't exist."

Dr. James Baker - NOAA

Answer 6

Don M is correct. Almost all scientists believe in global warming. Some believe it's caused by man, some believe it's caused by nature, but most believe it's a combination of man and nature. The big disagreement is which (man or nature) is the primary cause.

Answer 7

No--and no one is going to waste time doing such a study. Global warming--and its human origins--are established fact. And yes--all reputable scients KNOW that. KNOW--it is not a matter of believing.

If you want to satisfy yourself on this point,take a look at articles in recent professional scientific journals. A brief survey of that will make the real views of scientists obvious.

Answer 8

Not really sure. I think what most scientists agree on is the effect (there has been measurable climate change of statistical significance; i.e., not due to chance variations). What they disagree on is cause: is it human-induced changes to the global temperature, or 500-year warming cycles about which we know little other than that they occur, and have occurred (that's just one example). The reason this matters is that if there is a natural cause, then human action may make no difference. If, however, the demonstrable cause is human actionn, then human action to counteract those actions might make a difference. Most of the actions we're taking, though, such as buying hybrids, have more political siginficance than environmental impact -- however, that's just my opinion.

Answer 9

your language tries to insinuate that it's a religion. you dont "believe in" global warming.