Scientists from the University of Queensland conducted a survey based on 30,000 scientific peer-reviewed papers published over the past 20 years, identifying that 97.1% of the studies found climate change to be caused by human activities.
The findings were published in the journal Environmental Research Letters earlier this week. It was concluded that among scientists, there is a strong consensus about the causes of climate change.
John Cook, one of the co-authors of the study, however, pointed out that the general public does not agree with the scientific findings. Last October it was established that only 42% of the Americans believe climate change is anthropogenic.
The authors are certain that this gap in perception is caused by lobbying efforts of the industry to undermine the importance of the scientific findings. It is also stated that this is a main reason for the lack of political action against climate change.
The extensive survey was conducted in collaboration with numerous volunteers, who took part in the revision of the scientific abstracts. The authors are convinced that such strong conclusions will encourage some political action, and hopefully close the gap between public perception and science.
Many leading scientists, however, are still not entirely convinced that educating the public could help shaping up policies.
Here is the problem with the above article or the study it references, If one picks out 100 studies that say humans are the cause of climate change then you could say 100% agree with the subject. Just because there are more people trying to prove it’s man made does not mean its real it just means they have a large following. Everything contributes to green house gas production so everything causes climate change. It’s not that it isn’t true its just that its a scam to influence policy changes. Why are there not more scientist writing papers saying climate change is natural? Well it’s kinda a no brainer the climate has been changing constantly since the beginning. Now here is the topping on the cake and before you can say man has a dog in the fight….. How much carbon is sequestered during normal human activity? How much carbon is produced during normal activity and what is the net difference? How much has the natural process of carbon sequestering been augmented by human activity. So before you can claim anything other than we are adding to the carbon cycle you must establish the factors in the equation otherwise your just blowing smoke. I’ve done some of the math and looked up some of the figures. The claims are just that claims. Real science does not have an agenda it is based upon facts. Do the study and show me the facts. Otherwise its just hype and propaganda they are trying to sell an idea not prove it. I’ve run into this time and time again over the years. Some believe if you tell a lie enough times that somehow it will be the truth.