I can't remember a time when Lefty politicians, activists, and green penises in general weren't trying to somehow blame human beings for climate changing. Oh, sure, they changed what they called it, from global cooling to global warming to finally very vague 'climate change,' but the message has remained the same. Evil mankind is destroying the planet, and if we don't give the government more money, then it will only get worse, and HEY, 97% of scientists agree!
Gosh, that seems like a lot of scientists, you know?
But guess what? You guessing?
Yeah, that's BS.
A false narrative.
Recommended
A lie, even.
Take a look:
**The 97% Consensus Myth Debunked**
— Watts Up With That (@wattsupwiththat) May 30, 2025
The claim that 97% (or more) of climate scientists agree humans caused all recent global warming and that it's an existential threat is a persistent myth. It's not based on solid evidence but on flawed studies that manipulate data to create a…
Post continues:
... a false narrative.
Key culprits are Cook et al. (2013) and Lynas et al. (2021), both published in Environmental Research Letters. These studies reviewed thousands of climate papers but excluded the majority that took no position on warming's causes—66-69% in each case. By only counting papers that endorsed anthropogenic global warming (AGW), they artificially inflated consensus figures to 97-99%. This ignores neutral research and forces scientists to include AGW disclaimers in unrelated studies just to get published.
Worse, these studies measure consensus in literature, not among scientists. A 2016 survey of American Meteorological Society (AMS) members reveals the truth: 96% agree climate change is happening, and 67% say humans are a major factor. But there's no consensus that all warming is man-made or dangerous—many see mixed or beneficial impacts.
Climate alarmists often cite organizations like AMS or NASA without evidence. Yet, as shown, disagreement among experts is significant. The real debate isn't about climate change existing; it's about its causes, extent, and risks. Claims of overwhelming agreement are overblown and used to stifle discussion.
Read that again ...
Claims of overwhelming agreement are overblown and used to stifle discussion.
SAY IT AIN'T SO!
We all knew, of course, but seeing it in black and white like this? WINNER WINNER CHICKEN DINNER.
============================================================
Related:
Video Fact-NUKES 'Legacy Media' Pushing GROSS Hamas Lies in REAL-TIME and It's GLORIOUS (Watch)
============================================================
