Climate change science resources

This next entry will have to be in parts

https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html
List of Worldwide Scientific Organizations
The following are scientific organizations that hold the position that Climate Change has been caused by human action:

1. Academia Chilena de Ciencias, Chile
2. Academia das Ciencias de Lisboa, Portugal
3. Academia de Ciencias de la República Dominicana
4. Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela
5. Academia de Ciencias Medicas, Fisicas y Naturales de Guatemala
6. Academia Mexicana de Ciencias,Mexico
7. Academia Nacional de Ciencias de Bolivia
8. Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru
9. Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
10. Académie des Sciences, France
11. Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada
12. Academy of Athens
13. Academy of Science of Mozambique
14. Academy of Science of South Africa
15. Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS)
16. Academy of Sciences Malaysia
17. Academy of Sciences of Moldova
18. Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic
19. Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran
20. Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt
21. Academy of the Royal Society of New Zealand
22. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy
23. Africa Centre for Climate and Earth Systems Science
24. African Academy of Sciences
25. Albanian Academy of Sciences
26. Amazon Environmental Research Institute
27. American Academy of Pediatrics
28. American Anthropological Association
    1. 
       
    2. American Association for the Advancement of Science
    3. American Association of State Climatologists (AASC)
    4. American Association of Wildlife Veterinarians
    5. American Astronomical Society
    6. American Chemical Society
    7. American College of Preventive Medicine
    8. American Fisheries Society
    9. American Geophysical Union
    10. American Institute of Biological Sciences
    11. American Institute of Physics
    12. American Meteorological Society
    13. American Physical Society
    14. American Public Health Association
    15. American Quaternary Association
    16. American Society for Microbiology
    17. American Society of Agronomy
    18. American Society of Civil Engineers
    19. American Society of Plant Biologists
    20. American Statistical Association
    21. Association of Ecosystem Research Centers
    22. Australian Academy of Science
    23. Australian Bureau of Meteorology
    24. Australian Coral Reef Society
    25. Australian Institute of Marine Science
    26. Australian Institute of Physics
    27. Australian Marine Sciences Association
    28. Australian Medical Association

 

Continued from above
https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

1. Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
2. Bangladesh Academy of Sciences
3. Botanical Society of America
4. Brazilian Academy of Sciences
5. British Antarctic Survey
6. Bulgarian Academy of Sciences
7. California Academy of Sciences
8. Cameroon Academy of Sciences
9. Canadian Association of Physicists
10. Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences
11. Canadian Geophysical Union
12. Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society
13. Canadian Society of Soil Science
14. Canadian Society of Zoologists
15. Caribbean Academy of Sciences views
16. Center for International Forestry Research
17. Chinese Academy of Sciences
18. Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences
19. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) (Australia)
20. Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research
21. Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences
22. Crop Science Society of America
23. Cuban Academy of Sciences
24. Delegation of the Finnish Academies of Science and Letters
25. Ecological Society of America
26. Ecological Society of Australia
27. Environmental Protection Agency
28. European Academy of Sciences and Arts
29. European Federation of Geologists
30. European Geosciences Union
31. European Physical Society
32. European Science Foundation
33. Federation of American Scientists
34. French Academy of Sciences
35. Geological Society of America
36. Geological Society of Australia
37. Geological Society of London
38. Georgian Academy of Sciences
39. German Academy of Natural Scientists Leopoldina

 

Continued from above

https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

1. Ghana Academy of Arts and Sciences
2. Indian National Science Academy
3. Indonesian Academy of Sciences
4. Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management
5. Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology
6. Institute of Professional Engineers New Zealand
7. Institution of Mechanical Engineers, UK
8. InterAcademy Council
9. International Alliance of Research Universities
10. International Arctic Science Committee
11. International Association for Great Lakes Research
12. International Council for Science
13. International Council of Academies of Engineering and Technological Sciences
14. International Research Institute for Climate and Society
15. International Union for Quaternary Research
16. International Union of Geodesy and Geophysics
17. International Union of Pure and Applied Physics
18. Islamic World Academy of Sciences
19. Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities
20. Kenya National Academy of Sciences
21. Korean Academy of Science and Technology
22. Kosovo Academy of Sciences and Arts
23. l'Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal
24. Latin American Academy of Sciences
25. Latvian Academy of Sciences
26. Lithuanian Academy of Sciences
27. Madagascar National Academy of Arts, Letters, and Sciences
28. Mauritius Academy of Science and Technology
29. Montenegrin Academy of Sciences and Arts

 

Continued from above

https://www.opr.ca.gov/facts/list-of-scientific-organizations.html

1. National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina
2. National Academy of Sciences of Armenia
3. National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic
4. National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka
5. National Academy of Sciences, United States of America
6. National Aeronautics and Space Administration
7. National Association of Geoscience Teachers
8. National Association of State Foresters
9. National Center for Atmospheric Research
10. National Council of Engineers Australia
11. National Institute of Water & Atmospheric Research, New Zealand
12. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
13. National Research Council
14. National Science Foundation
15. Natural England
16. Natural Environment Research Council, UK
17. Natural Science Collections Alliance
18. Network of African Science Academies
19. New York Academy of Sciences
20. Nicaraguan Academy of Sciences
21. Nigerian Academy of Sciences
22. Norwegian Academy of Sciences and Letters
23. Oklahoma Climatological Survey
24. Organization of Biological Field Stations
25. Pakistan Academy of Sciences
26. Palestine Academy for Science and Technology
27. Pew Center on Global Climate Change
28. Polish Academy of Sciences
29. Romanian Academy
30. Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium
31. Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain
32. Royal Astronomical Society, UK
33. Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters
34. Royal Irish Academy
35. Royal Meteorological Society (UK)
36. Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences
37. Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research
38. Royal Scientific Society of Jordan
39. Royal Society of Canada
40. Royal Society of Chemistry, UK
41. Royal Society of the United Kingdom
42. Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences
43. Russian Academy of Sciences
44. Science and Technology, Australia
45. Science Council of Japan
46. Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research
47. Scientific Committee on Solar-Terrestrial Physics
48. Scripps Institution of Oceanography
49. Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts
50. Slovak Academy of Sciences
51. Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts
52. Society for Ecological Restoration International
53. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics
54. Society of American Foresters
55. Society of Biology (UK)
56. Society of Systematic Biologists
57. Soil Science Society of America
58. Sudan Academy of Sciences
59. Sudanese National Academy of Science
60. Tanzania Academy of Sciences
61. The Wildlife Society (international)
62. Turkish Academy of Sciences
63. Uganda National Academy of Sciences
64. Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities
65. United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
66. University Corporation for Atmospheric Research
67. Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution
68. Woods Hole Research Center
69. World Association of Zoos and Aquariums
70. World Federation of Public Health Associations
71. World Forestry Congress
72. World Health Organization
73. World Meteorological Organization
74. Zambia Academy of Sciences
75. Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences

Now the next time someone claims AGW is just a “conspiracy among scientists” please post this list because for a conspiracy to operate all the scientists in all these organisations worldwide would have to be in on it.

Think about that

 

Darn! Spellcheck! I meant to post there was no substantiation for his claims - biput then there never is

 

Hmmm. Speaking of cherry-picking. . . .
Sadly for your argument, neither Henrik Svensmark nor Nir Shaviv fits into your propaganda categories.

 

It seems increasingly likely that the solar wind, and not TSI, is the critical component in the Svensmark climate hypothesis.
Surprise! Study find solar winds hit north pole more than south
Anthony Watts
From the UA website and the not THAT Mann department: University of Alberta physicists have discovered a surprising imbalance in how the Earth responds to space weather driven by the…

 

The mill and the loss: Journal up to 39 retractions from paper mill articles

An abandoned paper mill, via Flickr

We’re rounding out the week with a third post about paper mills: A Taylor & Francis journal is up to 39 retractions of papers that appear to have been the work of one such mill. . . .

 

Consensus fallacies alive and well, most of these groups do it for political reasons.

 

So somehow the “political reasons are the same in all those named countries?
Tell me - just what powerful “political reasons span countries such as Canada, USA, Australia and Guatemala and Zimbabwe?

 

And a blog that is actually ensuring that Astroturf articles are NOT published proves what? That some articles are falsified? Based on poor and speculative science? Well, you might be an expert on that since you just linked to debunked theories

 

Oh! Dear! Who convinced you that an Astroturf blog like Wattsupmybutt was worth the wasting time on?

I will debate honest science such as that found in the IPCC reports not some conspiracy blog that cannot even keep its message consistent

 

Science accepts or rejects ideas based on supporting and refuting evidence, claiming otherwise is denying reality.

The fine-tuning argument falls short because it assumes that our current cosmological theory is correct, as long as a non-scientific principle is invoked, God.

The scope of science is the world of nature. Outside the world of nature science has nothing to say about religious beliefs,except when the beliefs transcend the proper scope of religion and make assertions about the natural world that contradict scientific knowledge. Such statements cannot be true.

The Bible contains "some" historical facts, so does Gone with the Wind.

 

Retraction Watch is an excellent resource, and therefore belongs in a thread devoted to "science resources."

 

Not sure what you mean by "Astroturf" but that is beside the point. In this case WUWT plays its customary role as a science aggregator. As is WUWT's custom and practice, they link to the original journal article.
"The study, “Northern preference for terrestrial electromagnetic energy input from space weather,” was published in Nature Communications."

 

I admit the electorate is confused about who the "elites" are, and which party best looks after their interests.

eg, during the 2016 campaign, Hillary said: "The Dems are are the party of the disadvantaged", in answer to Trump's famous comment (re black ghettos): "You are living in poverty, your neighbourhoods are like war zones...."

At that time Donald gained my attention; but we soon noticed tax cuts going mostly to the rich, and car plants continuing to close.

That's why Bernie Sanders has such a strong following on the Left: eg, he promotes a living wage for all, and the elimination of poverty, whereupon the Right scream loss of jobs while rejecting higher taxes on the wealthy.

So your "elitist' mantra needs examination; in fact it is bound up in the hyper-partisanship wracking the body politic. [The cause of this political division is the failed obsolete neoliberal economic orthodoxy that pits workers against employers].

Fact: cost of energy from solar/wind backed by battery/pumped hydro storage is now equivalent to coal, and with costs of the former falling fast, it's rapidly becoming uneconomic to build new coal plants.

As for electric vehicles producing more CO2 during their construction, they will of course emit zero CO2 during use.....and a battery recycling industry can be developed.

 

Yes it does appear to be but again I ask what is your point? If it is to somehow discredit science by “proving” that there is bad science being published then you will get no traction from people educated in science. Academia is all about cognitive dissonance and in fact that is the best way to get the best results

 

The point is not to discredit science but to highlight the effort that goes into keeping it sound.

 

Which climate change? All of it? If not all, then how much of it? By what mechanism has human action caused such change?

Blank out.

The fact that none of these questions are considered, let alone addressed, let alone answered in the political document you cite shows that the "position" in question is a political and not a scientific one.

By what process did the majority of the members of these organizations endorse the position? How many of those who initiated or supported the endorsement have any expertise whatever in atmospheric physics?

The "position" in question is a political and not a scientific one.

BWAHAHHAHHAAAAA!! Seriously???

The "position" in question is a political and not a scientific one.

1. Seriously? Wildlife Veterinarians? The "position" in question is a political and not a scientific one.

Seriously? What possible expertise could astronomers, chemists, preventive medicine practitioners and fisheries activists have in estimating the effects of human activities on climate?

The "position" in question is a political and not a scientific one.

1. Seriously? What on earth would any of these people know about how human activities affect the earth's climate? The "position" in question is a political and not a scientific one.
   As above. How many of their members have personally endorsed the "position" these organizations have taken in their name? How many of those have any actual expertise in atmospheric physics?
   

Seriously? The AMA consists of physicians, not physicists. You don't seem to know the difference.

The "position" in question is OBVIOUSLY a political and not a scientific one.

 

You did. Your superstitious, evidence-free fear and hatred of it, and your constant false and disingenuous characterizations of it as a "cult," "Astroturf," and "conspiracy theory" are prima facie proof of its scientific credibility and accuracy. Nothing says, "Truth" more eloquently than dishonest attacks.

BWAHAHHHAHAHAAAA! You mean the "honest science" that unquestioningly supported Lyin' Michael Mann's erasure of the Medieval Warm Period and Little Ice Age?? That "honest science"?

Consistent messages are for baldly slanted and dishonest political propaganda like the IPCC reports, not impartial scientific inquiry.

 

I don't know of anyone who says it's a conspiracy among scientists. It's a hoax perpetrated by politically connected nonscientist poseurs like Lyin' Michael Mann and their political handlers.

No, that claim is just baldly false. In no case have the majority of the individual members of any of the above organizations specifically endorsed the political position on climate change taken in their name by the political administrators of the organization.

Think about that.

 

There is a difference between being educated in science and being a scientist. The authors of the paper mill papers had to have education in science to get the papers past peer review. They merely chose to place their science education in the service of personal benefit rather than the advancement of knowledge.

Except, of course, that any research that casts doubt on CAGW theory must be ruthlessly suppressed, and its authors ruined professionally.

 

That's exactly right.

It's just like here where businesses put up "Black Lives Matter" signs not because they really believed in it, but because they didn't want their business torched.

These people have no understanding of Academia and the peer-pressure to conform, even when wrong.

And now you have attitudes being weaponized and politicized by the Media, by governments and by other groups so that if you don't get onboard you lose government grants and monies, and get criticized in the Media and castigated online.

 

Not necessarily

Google up “Energy and Environment” sometime - an anti AGW mill that published anything from anyone anytime

 

I love conspiracy theorists who think that scientists, in thier tens of thousands around the world somehow are all part of the one grand conspiracy