99.84% of Peer Reviewed Articles Agree Climate Change Cause by Humans

Friday, November 27, 2015

–Consensus: 99.84% of Peer-Reviewed Articles Support the Idea of Climate Change Cause by human activity.

–On the Bonus Show: Professor caught watching porn in class, lack of sleep turns off genes, felony charge for releasing balloons, more…

If you liked this clip of The David Pakman Show, please do us a big favor and share it with your friends… and hit that “like” button!

http://www.davidpakman.com
Become a Member: http://www.davidpakman.com/membership
Like Us on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/davidpakmanshow
Follow Us on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/davidpakmanshow
Get TDPS Gear: http://www.davidpakman.com/gear
24/7 Voicemail Line: (219)-2DAVIDP

Subscribe to The David Pakman Show for more: http://www.youtube.com/subscription_center?add_user=midweekpolitics

Broadcast on February 27, 2013 Support TDPS by clicking (bookmark it too!) this link before shopping on Amazon: http://www.amazon.com/?tag=thedavpaksho-20
Video Rating: / 5

20 Comments

  1. HerecomesMonckton says:

    Cooking Climate Consensus Data: “97% of Scientists Affirm AGW" Debunked
    We reported on May 21("Global Warming 'Consensus': Cooking the Books")on the critiques of the Cook study by experts who show that Cook cooked the data.Out of the nearly 12,000 scientific papers Cook’s team evaluated, only 65 endorsed Cook’s alarmist position That’s less than one percent.The Cook study was flawed from the beginning, using selection parameters designed to weight the outcome in favor of the alarmist position

  2. V- Valentine says:

    The guy (safeinsuburbia) is a common troll who doesn't have a fainest idea of what scientific method is. He is skipping along topics spraying misinformation and using text book tactics like misdirection to support his failed argument. Don't bother.

  3. V- Valentine says:

    The research was done by Lawrence Powell and accuracy of his methodology can be checked in his published review of this matter. It is hilarious to watch deniers disguised as self proclaimed "skeptics" cling onto the decreasing number of evidence that AWG isn't happening.

  4. classicstorm says:

    There are some scientist that don't agree that humans are the cause of climate change did you find articles on that?…

  5. Aanthanur DC says:

    so having a denier claim it in a video makes it true? he doesn't provide a source or anything that would backup his claim. you blindly believe his claim and didn't even bother how research money from the US government is granted not which projects were funded etc etc. got no skeptical thinking skills ?

  6. safeinsuburbia says:

    I provided a source. You, haven't provided any evidence to support your position, only an emotional ad-hom attack.

  7. Aanthanur DC says:

    your claim about the funding is utterly wrong. your post exposes your ignorance on the topic. you better get yourself informed before you make such dumb claims that expose your ignorance.

  8. Richard Lock says:

    From Skeptical Science dot com
    "Modern scientists follow the evidence-based scientific method that Galileo pioneered. Skeptics who oppose scientific findings that threaten their world view are far closer to Galileo's belief-based critics in the Catholic Church."

  9. safeinsuburbia says:

    @GreatPirateSolomon just a quote from an old author. don't let it disturb your view of the world. you've got it all figured out, of course..

  10. GreatPirateSolomon says:

    Mmmhmm. Next I suppose you are going to tell me that 9/11 was an inside job. Please, go ahead and ruin what little credibility you have left.

  11. safeinsuburbia says:

    The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary. – H. L. Mencken

  12. safeinsuburbia says:

    I am astounded it doesn't bother you that the government doesn't fund research into natural GW, only AGW.

    Weren't you the one that said all anti AGW was funded by Discovery or some other evil corporate backed organization? How else would they get funding, if gov won't?

    I can't find your questions. If you'd like an answer, please restate, or I'll assume this matter is closed. I don't see how a week makes a difference here. I'm attempting an answer.

  13. GreatPirateSolomon says:

    I never asked a question about funding. Answer the questions I have asked or go away. Its nice that it took you a week to find an answer to a question I never asked though.

  14. safeinsuburbia says:

    Ok. I think I found a source to answer your question about funding.

    watch?v=potLQR7-_Tg

    See at 19:30, "government has funded virtually no research into natural causes of climate change."

    It starts getting interested at 18:54.

    No money in being a climate change "denialist" scientist.

    No wonder there are so few papers written against climate change.

    Do you have any other questions?

  15. safeinsuburbia says:

    Where there is insufficient data, there is only theological debate.

    See this comments section for a demonstration.

  16. erbeeflower says:

    we all used to think the earth was flat too…..

  17. poopisnotpoop says:

    No, I got it from the same place they got it from.
    It's called science. They can measure these things. You should look it up sometime, it's quite fascinating.
    And just so I know, why do you think people like Gore and Greenpeace exist? What could they possibly want? Greenpeace is non-profit, Gore is out of politics. They are not benefited by people knowing these facts. Why do YOU think they spend so much time on this?

  18. 1000frolly says:

    'As for being at an all time low? That is just willfully ignorant. The amount of Co2 is bigger now than any other period in history, It's doubled even the highest peaks of natural warming.'.
    .
    Wonder where you got this beauty from ? Al Gore? Maybe Greenpeace??

  19. 1000frolly says:

    1) You must be dreaming; have you seen the economy of Spain, the greens 'poster economy of the future'?
    2) We agree on the figures, as I clearly said, I was talking about the carbon cycle, you are speaking of the CO2 cycle; the figues are the same.
    3) This is another 'green' fallacy; that nature was "In balance" before man came along and upset it. Its pure fiction because nature is not, and has never been "in balance". Nature cannot tell 'our' CO2 from other CO2!

  20. GreatPirateSolomon says:

    Your hero Lord Bumfuckington has been thoroughly debunked time and time again.

Leave a Reply