COOK NUCCITELL PAPER REAFFIRMED 2014 .............................................................................................. skepticalscience/docs/24_errors.pdf?f=24errors On the off-chance that you’re unfamiliar with this issue, Cook and Nuccitelli’s peer-reviewed paper, published by respected journal Environmental Research Letters, confirmed what a number of previous studies had already found: Oreskes 2004, Doran & Zimmerman 2009, Anderegg et.al., 2010 all discovered that around 97% of climate scientists and/or the papers they published support the basic tenets of global warming caused by human agency. more recently .............1. Cook et al 2013 examined some 12,000 papers matching the topics global climate change or global warming in their abstracts. iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/8/2/024024 Of the 12,000 papers found using search keywords, 4,000 addressed the cause of the warming - these were then categorized into agreement or disagreement. In total: * 12,280 papers mentioned climate change. * 4,011 papers addressed the cause. * 3,933 papers endorsed AGW. * 78 refuted it. For those 4,011 papers actually addressing the cause of warming, the authors of those papers were asked to self-rate their own papers. 98% of those authors said that their own specific published papers in question endorsed AGW. The fact that two-thirds of the 12,000 papers reviewed did not explicitly endorse climate change or global warming completely undercuts the denier meme that scientists have adopted pro-AGW positions in order to feed at the grant feed trough. Further, fake-skeptic Richard Tol accidentally confirmed the 97% global warming consensus. An own-goal if there ever was one. skepticalscience/docs/24_errors.pdf 2. Of 13,950 climate change papers published between 1991 and 2012, only 24 reject the consensus on climate change. Thats 1 in 581 (0.17%). That means that of 33,690 authors of those 13,950 papers, only 34 disagree (about 1 in 1,000). With humans unanimity is often impossible. Because cranks still exist. For example, in baseball, slam-dunk-certain Hall-of-Famers do not receive unanimous votes, as some voters feel it is their divine right to withhold unanimity from even those most deserving of sainthood. jamespowell.org/files/stacks_image_733.jpg jamespowell.org/ 3. Of 9,136 authors of recent, peer-reviewed articles published in reputable journals, just one authored an article rejecting man-made global warming (November 12, 2012 through December 31, 2013). Thats 1 in 9,136 (0.01%). The established consensus is thus that 99.99% of authors of recent peer-reviewed articles on climate change do not disagree with AGW. 99.99%. jamespowell.org/resources/Jan12014piechart.png jamespowell.org/ 99.99% As can be seen, the evidence clearly shows that the current and ongoing warming of our globe and the attendant changing of our climate is due to human industrial activities. In scientific circles this is the climatological equivalent of the Earth being round - a fact so plainly obvious and supported by such a vast body of scientific evidence that to question its reality is absurd. and then in 2014 ..............COOK NUCCITELL ...PAPER REAFFIRMED 2014 still 97% ... 97% now confirmed by peer review at least 6 times
Posted on: Wed, 24 Dec 2014 01:50:22 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015