Do you think humans are helping cause Climate change?

[Kynes]

Rath said:

Kynes said:

In groupthink, organizations value consensus more than free thought. The emphasis on consensus leads to group polarization, in which a group’s positions become more extreme than any individual would come up with. Alarmist climate science is a textbook example of groupthink in action.

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/04/30/why-climate-science-is-a-textbook-example-of-groupthink/

The problem is that the consensus is generally considered by individuals to be conservative.

The IPCC report (which I'm taking to be the 'consensus' view) is considered by many individual climate scientists to always take the lowest bound of the models - the lowest amount of warming that will occur, the lowest amount of sea level rise that will result etc.

 

@Soundwave. Do you have any science to back up climate change being unpredictable?

 

@The hydrogen debate. As useful as hydrogen fuel could be it simply isn't practical in vehicles because of the fact that it's pretty damned unstable. Electricity (from fusion hopefully) will be the thing to replace petrol.

Are you talking about these conservative predictions?

 

 

By 1990 IPCC prediction, we should have had now 0.8 C more than we have. 1995, 2001 and 2007 predictions have huge margins of error, an error of 0.2C in 5 years in the 2007 one. I just can't see that as a conservative prediction. IPCC 1990 prediction was mainly based in Hansen's 1988 A scenario, the less conservative of the three scenarios and supposedly based on no CO2 emissions cut:

 

 

If we use lower air data, which can't be manipulated using only selected ground stations, things change dramatically:

I can't accept that these are conservative estimations.