Debunking The “97%” Consensus Claims – Part I

An excellent rebuttal to the constantly quoted “97%”.

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

By Paul Homewood

Someone mentioned the other day (sorry, forgot who!) that it would be nice to have a simple, go-to piece debunking the “97% of scientists agree” claptrap, which is spewed out by politicians and the media whenever they do not want to discuss facts.

There are essentially two studies which these claims are based around, so I will devote a separate post to each.

The first stems from an analysis in 2008 by Maggie Zimmerman of the University of Illinois.

I can’t do any better than repeat the post by Lawrence Solomon in the Financial Post, which utterly discredits it:

View original post 1,039 more words

Advertisements

Comment quotes of the month

Fun quotes from the comment sections on the net:

Meanwhile Texas is drowing in its SECOND climate change driven flood of the last few months.
No proof of this anywhere, yet it’s constantly used to “prove” global warming, as if no flooding ever occurred prior to 1900.
The “climategate” emails showed no evidence of data fabrication. The now famous phrase about using a trick to hide the decline referred to a discussion of whether to use proxy data that diverged from direct instrumental data in one particular graph of temperatures through history. Whether the scientists used the proxy data or not, they were not talking about altering any data. 

Yet every time a skeptic choses to use one set of data and not another, there is the screaming of “cherry picking”. Global warming believers cannot even define terms consistently, yet we are to believe they have complete and untainted knowledge of the future? Belief in psychics and a religion worshipping Gaia is what this is–there is NO science in any of this.

This stupid nonsense about “climategate” has been debunked by no fewer than EIGHT independent investigations. Still you sociopaths paste these lies all over the internet. Shame on you. You’re killing people and destroying property. You’re no different than common vandals and terrorists. 

This is what “rational scientific discussion” of global warming looks like–calling people vandals, sociopaths and terrorists if they disagree with the religion of global warming. It has to be a religion–no real scientist would ever call someone who disagrees with him a “terrorist”. Only religious and political zealots do that.

Anti-science Christian-right Koch-supported Tea-Partier, who thinks God controls the climate, wants access to all your emails to see if you ever said anything that can be used against you somehow. All because of denier blog idiocy. Thanks a lot, guys.
Come on, Lew, were are your studies on the conspiracy ideology of global warming believers? The internet is drowning in examples. I’d be happy to forward you a thousand or so similar comments about Big Oil conspiracies, Tea Party conspiracies, religious conspiracies. Whole “believer” blogs are filled with them, used as justification for believing in global warming.  The paper is crying out to be written, and you, as the truly impartial scientist you are, must simply be lacking the time to collect the needed data. I can help. Science needs the whole story told and you are a scientist. Drop me your email and I’ll get right on providing the data. I eagerly await your letting the world know how much conspiracy ideation exists and is contaminating all of climate science and policy.

According to our first commenter, this photo is PROOF of global cooling—frost on August 23rd, the earliest ever.  It only takes one or two events as proof, you know.

According to our first commenter, this photo is PROOF of global cooling—frost on August 23rd, the earliest ever. It only takes one or two events as proof, you know.

Conspiracies and Fantasies

Once again, verification that global warming believers are indeed conspiracy theorists–Sheldon Whitehouse and his RICO act and all those defending him.
From the Huffington Post: The Wall Street Journal piece also notes that my previous Washington Post op-ed “cited Willie Soon of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, who has published politically inconvenient research on changes in solar radiation.” Not noted by the Journal: Dr. Soon reportedly received more than half of his funding from big fossil fuel interests like Exxon-Mobile and the Charles G. Koch Foundation, to the tune of $1.2 million. Some of Dr. Soon’s research contracts gave his industry backers a chance to see what he was doing “for comment and input” before he published it.

Really? I suppose that then too applies to the new IPCC chairman (not a scientist, of course but an economist) who worked for Exxon Mobil at one time. Is no one quaking in fear that this is an industry plant and the IPCC will suddenly start backing off the whole global warming idea? It’s right in line with the rest of the conspiratorial beliefs of the global warming crew. Hoesung Lee has been with the IPCC for some time.  A full investigation into whether he is an industry plant seems warranted, since any association with fossil fuel industry is 100% malignent when these past/current employment stints occur with those who question the theory and its solution.  Seems it would work the same way with those on the believer side, resulting in extreme suspicion of anyone backing the AGW mantra who ever received a dime from the fossil fuel industry.  Surely the AGW crowd should be more thoroughly investigaing their own.  In addition, perhaps Lewandosky should study the believers side for conspiracy ideation–I can see book growing from that kind of study.
In the “reality has been totally lost category”:
Q: El Niño is such a big problem, why aren’t people doing anything to solve it? Why aren’t they trying to find a way to prevent El Niño?
(from USA today weather resources site http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/weather/resources/askjack/wfaqnino.htm)

It seems that global warming scientists have now convinced people we have achieved Star Trek’s weather control capabilities. The idea that is even a question that is put on an informational page indicates just how far into science fiction people have been lead by those who overstate certainty and human’s abilities to control the planet. This is a HUGE disconnect from reality and should be of grave concern for all of society. We are still at the “War of Worlds” level of understanding. Who knows what could be sold to a society that believes evil rich people of the wrong political party are controlling the weather and will destroy the world in doing so?

I cant' take it anymore…...

I cant’ take it anymore……