[purplefrog]

Science is one of the premier scholarly journals that represents all areas of scientific research. The abstract below describes a paper that supports the view that the there is scientific consensus on the issue of global warming and that it is, in part, related to human activity. The editorial board of another premier journal, "The National Academy of Sciences", also states there is consensus. It is not difficult to find a few scientists who are dissenters to the consensus. Some of them are even going to have lofty credentials. As I stated in another post, there is always some dissent in the scientific community. But the fact remains these reputable journals along with numerous scientific organizations agree that a consensus exists. That is a fact. Consensus does not mean unanimity. You can certainly agree with the minority opinion if you like, but just realize that most scientists consider it wrong. Could the minority eventually be proven correct? Absolutely, but is simply less likely to be true.
__________________________________________________ ____
Science 3 December 2004:
Vol. 306. no. 5702, p. 1686

BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER:
The Scientific Consensus on Climate Change
Naomi Oreskes

Policy-makers and the public who are not members of the relevant research community have had to form opinions about the reality of global climate change on the basis of often conflicting descriptions provided by the media regarding the level of scientific certainty attached to studies of climate. In this Essay, Oreskes analyzes the existing scientific literature to show that there is a robust consensus that anthropogenic global climate change is occurring. Thus, despite claims sometimes made by some groups that there is not good evidence that Earth's climate is being affected by human activities, the scientific community is in overwhelming agreement that such evidence is clear and persuasive.