And only one of the 528 papers reviewed makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.”

Remember this dire warning from 15 years ago?

On November 18, 1992, the Union of Concerned Scientists,
..representing over 1,500 of the world’s leading scientists
..(including 99 Nobel laureates), issued an Urgent Warning to
..Humanity that implored all peoples of the world to halt the
..accelerating damage to Mother Earth’s life support systems. The
..scientists warned us that we may have as little as ten years to
..avert the environmental disasters that now confront us.*1
..
..”The human world is beyond its limits. The present way of doing
..things is unsustainable. The future, to be viable at all, must
..be one drawing back, easing down, healing.” If correction is not
..made, a collapse is certain “within the lifetimes of many who are
..alive today.”*2
..
..1 “World’s Scientists Issue Urgent Warning to Humanity” —
.. Union of Concerned Scientists (11/18/92).

How Many Scientists Say That Mankind Is Affecting Global Warming?
Conventional Wisdom

Earlier this year the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said it was “90 percent likely” that man was having an impact on global temperatures. And dailytech.com reports an analysis of scientific papers in 2004 concluded that a majority of researchers supported what it called the “consensus view” that humans were effecting climate change.

But now a study of all research papers between 2004 and 2007 indicates only seven percent give an explicit endorsement of that so-called consensus. Forty-five percent give an implicit endorsement. But 48 percent of the papers are classified as neutral — neither accepting nor rejecting the hypothesis. And only one of the 528 papers reviewed makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.

Another case of environmentalists fighting among themselves. It concerns the new global warming movie — “The 11th Hour” — produced and co-written by actor and activist Leonardo DiCaprio.

The film contends that cutting fewer trees and using less wood would be beneficial to the environment. But Greenpeace co-founder Patrick Moore writes on Canada.com the opposite is true — that using more wood, and growing more trees — is a better plan. Moore says trees absorb carbon dioxide — convert it to wood — and that wood retains the CO2 when it is cut down. He says trees release the carbon dioxide only when they rot or burn.

Moore says increased use of wood could lead to less use of concrete, steel, and plastic — which produce large amounts of CO2 during manufacturing.