Debunking the 97% 'consensus' on global warming
The
main pillar of the warmist argument is the contention that a
"consensus" exists among scientists that global warming is caused by man
and threatens catastrophe. But a Canada-based group calling itself
Friends of Science has just completed a review of the four main studies used to document the alleged consensus and found
that only 1 - 3% of respondents "explicitly stated agreement with the
IPCC declarations on global warming," and that there was "no agreement
with a catastrophic view."
Actually reviewing the sources cited by the Oreskes study discovered this distribution of views, for example:
The conclusions of the report are rather shocking, and it deserves close attention. No doubt, the group, which is based in Calgary, will be attacked as an energy industry front, but its examination of the underlying reports on which the alleged consensus is based can be replicated. One wayt or another, a fraud is being committed - either the debunking is a fraud, or more likely, the consensus claim is fraudulent. Given that trillions of dollars are at stake, this report deserves the closest possible examination.
"These 'consensus' surveys appear to be used as a 'social proof,'" says Ken Gregory, research director of Friends of Science. "Just because a science paper includes the words 'global climate change' this does not define the cause, impact or possible mitigation. The 97% claim is contrived in all cases."
The Oreskes (2004) study claimed 75% consensus and a "remarkable lack of disagreement" by the other 25% of the abstracts she reviewed. Peiser (2005) re-ran her survey and found major discrepancies. Only 1.2% or 13 scientists out of 1,117 agreed with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) view that human activity is the main cause of global warming since 1950.
Actually reviewing the sources cited by the Oreskes study discovered this distribution of views, for example:
The conclusions of the report are rather shocking, and it deserves close attention. No doubt, the group, which is based in Calgary, will be attacked as an energy industry front, but its examination of the underlying reports on which the alleged consensus is based can be replicated. One wayt or another, a fraud is being committed - either the debunking is a fraud, or more likely, the consensus claim is fraudulent. Given that trillions of dollars are at stake, this report deserves the closest possible examination.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/02/debunking_the_97_consensus_on_global_warming.html#ixzz2tvuEquyc
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
No comments:
Post a Comment