May 19, 2008 • Vol. 13, No. 34 Download Now! (pdf)

 

COVER
A Counterinsurgency Grows in Khost
by Ann Marlowe

EDITORIAL
Countering Iran
by Reuel Marc Gerecht

SCRAPBOOK
JFK's foibles, the PC police, etc.

ARTICLES
Gloomy Republicans
by Fred Barnes

The War Over the War (cont.)
by Reihan Salam

We're All Gun Nuts Now
by John McCormack

What to Expect When You're Expecting...
by Lawrence B. Lindsey

FEATURES
They Backed Boris
by James Kirchick

Jeremiah Wright's 'Trumpet'
by Stanley Kurtz

BOOKS & ARTS
Trouble Down Below
by Mark Falcoff

The Strategist
by Daniel Sullivan

Hollywood Hybrid
by Joe Queenan

Weapon of Choice
by Joan Frawley Desmond

'Orfeo' at 400
by Algis Valiunas

A $uperhero's Saga
by John Podhoretz

CASUAL
Agenbites
by Joseph Bottum

CORRESPONDENCE
Rev. Wright, patriotic newsman, and more

PARODY
Mars attacks the global candy market


« Congress Destroys Student Loan Market | Main | Headline of the Day »

Consensus?

Via Hit & Run, a Harris Interactive poll of climate scientists:

A slight majority (54%) believe the warming measured over the last 100 years is not “within the range of natural temperature fluctuation.”...

Based on current trends, 41% of scientists believe global climate change will pose a very great danger to the earth in the next 50 to 100 years, compared to 13% who see relatively little danger. Another 44% rate climate change as moderately dangerous.

In addition, "84 percent believe that man-made global warming is occurring." Color me unimpressed. If 16 percent don't believe man-made global warming is occurring--that's a minority, but hardly a lunatic fringe. Sort of like thinking John Edwards would make a good a president, except with a chance you might be proved right. And what about the degree of confidence? Only 74 percent believe there is actual evidence of man-made global warming, which leaves 10 percent who take it as an article of faith--not very reassuring.

Bottom line: more than a quarter of all scientists don't see any conclusive evidence of man-made warming, which leaves us well short of anything that might reasonably be called a scientific consensus.

Email the article Consensus? to a friend:

Send this article to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


 
Contributors
Editor:
Michael Goldfarb

Contributors:
Dean Barnett
Jennifer Chou
Brian Faughnan
Ulf Gartzke
Reuben F. Johnson
Thomas Joscelyn
Stuart Koehl
John Noonan
Bill Roggio
Samantha Sault
Search
Archives
Contact
wws@weeklystandard.com
Categories
Feeds: Atom | RSS
[What is this?]
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2