Consensus? What Consensus?

Global Warming Survey Virtually Meaningless

London: In recent weeks US President Obama and the UK’s Energy and Climate Secretary Ed Davey have both cited a survey of climate science abstracts that alleges an overwhelming consensus on the subject of global warming.

In a new briefing note published by the Global Warming Policy Foundation today, Andrew Montford reviews the methodology used in the survey and concludes that the consensus revealed by the paper by Cook et al. is so broad that it incorporates the views of most prominent climate sceptics.

“The consensus as described by the survey is virtually meaningless and tells us nothing about the current state of scientific opinion beyond the trivial observation that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and that human activities have warmed the planet to some unspecified extent,” Andrew Montford says.

“The survey methodology therefore fails to address the key points that are in dispute in the global warming debate,” Montford adds.

Andrew Montford: Consensus? What Consensus? (PDF)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
September 3, 2013 11:37 pm

Once again, if you go looking for something, you will more than likely find it. However, that is not science.

September 4, 2013 12:59 am

Reblogged this on Cornwall Wind Watch and commented:
Oh dear Davey, were you quoted pseudoscience papers again ?? Thank you WUWT as ever

September 4, 2013 1:44 am

Cook et al. will take a smidgen of a molehill and turn it into the whole of a mountain. They don’t want facts, facts would just get in the way. They and their ilk have a world to take over. What use are facts to them?

September 4, 2013 3:27 am

Ed Davey should stop pussy-footing around with a non-existent ‘consensus’ and focus instead on the UK’s Met Office problems. In 2012, after a dry spring, the UK had a hosepipe ban and the Met Office’s £33M computer predicted a dry BBQ summer. It turned out to be one of the wettest summers in living memory and the wettest June on record.
On 18th June this year, Prof Stephen Belcher (Met Office Hadley Centre) predicted a decade of wet summers. “The 20-year cycle began in 2007, with six of the past seven summers being wet, and this trend will continue” he said. “Wet summers are more likely for the next 5 to 10 years. This is due to Atlantic multi-decadal oscillation – and climate change may be intensifying the cycle. I am excited about this research, it’s a new thing that we really didn’t know about.” Dr Adam Scaife (Met Office Hadley Centre) also quoted “In 2012, like the previous few summers, warm North Atlantic conditions brought milder temperatures and rain. The same pre-conditioning is there again this year. This summer will be slightly wetter than average.”
Well Met Office, here’s the embarrassing statistics for this years wet summer . . . .
From 18th June to 31st August 2013 (75 days)
2 days of heavy rain (23 & 29 July – the latter came with spectacular thunderstorms and hail).
4 days of moderate rain.
18 days with very light showers or fine ‘mizzle’ at some stage – but nothing to worry about.
6 cloudy days, hardly much sun shining through, but DRY.
45 glorious days of complete sunshine with no rain whatsoever.
69% dry, 24% very slightly damp, 5% wet, 2% washout.
Footnote 1: UK Businesses rely on Met Office predictions. 2012’s washout summer saw retailers tying up precious capital in garden furniture, BBQ food and equipment – which hardly sold. This summer, paddling pools and cooling fans were like gold dust – everywhere was out of stock whilst shops couldn’t shift their stockpiles of umbrellas and raincoats.
Footnote 2: There also has been hardly any breeze throughout this glorious UK summer – so a big kick in the teeth for those with a vested interest in bat-chomping bird-slicing eco crucifixes.

September 4, 2013 4:15 am

Even the Warmists who were included denied the classification.

September 4, 2013 6:03 am

> 45 glorious days of complete sunshine with no rain whatsoever.
The downside of Sunny Olde England. Err, new England. With tall buildings. And concave surfaces. And reflective windows.

September 4, 2013 6:46 am

Thanks Ric. Yes, several WUWT visitors posted about this yesterday. The buckled Jag is awful.

September 4, 2013 7:15 am

Flaws? Impossible. A responsible journal has testified that it has acquired a collection secret testimonials that there is nothing remiss in Cook’s testimony that a majority of like-minded people testify to being like-minded.
If you know anything about science you know that this proves that AGW is the theory best supported by the evidence and so absolutely correct and beyond the judgement of science denying skeptics

Gail Combs
September 4, 2013 7:17 am

Food has been a military weapon since agriculture first started. To be blunt killing the livestock and burning the fields of the enemy or your own in the case of a retreat is very good strategy.
Unfortunately in most industrialized countries we are four or more generations off the farm and have lost our appreciation for where our food actually comes from. In the USA for example, the Census classifies only 18% of the population as rural. The portrait of the dumb gun toting redneck primative throwback in the MSM for years has been intentionally fostered to marginalize the opinions of farmers.
To many food comes from the store wrapped and sanitized with absolutely no connection to the farmer who produced it with no realization that there is less than a weeks supply if the trucks cease to run or no supply at all if harvest fail in more than one hemisphere. Heck kids don’t know where eggs, milk and more important a Big Mac comes from and if they find out the reaction is YUCK!

“We’ve not been producing as much as we are consuming. That is why stocks are being run down. Supplies are now very tight across the world and reserves are at a very low level, leaving no room for unexpected events next year,” said Abdolreza Abbassian, a senior economist with the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO). With food consumption exceeding the amount grown for six of the past 11 years, countries have run down reserves from an average of 107 days of consumption 10 years ago to under 74 days recently.
Prices of main food crops such as wheat and maize are now close to those that sparked riots in 25 countries in 2008. FAO figures released this week suggest that 870 million people are malnourished and the food crisis is growing in the Middle East and Africa. Wheat production this year is expected to be 5.2% below 2011, with yields of most other crops, except rice, also falling, says the UN.

A few appropriate quotes from my treasure trove:
“The Collective Farm Policy was a terrible struggle, Ten million died. It was fearful. Four years it lasted. It was absolutely necessary.” Joseph Stalin
Why was it necessary?
“The Socialist Revolution in the US cannot take place because there are too many small independent farmers there. Those people are the stability factor. We here in Russia must hurry while our government is stupid enough to not encourage and support the independent farmership.” V. Lenin, the founder of the Russian revolution
Quote provided by Anna Fisher
1934, “[Our] future is becoming visible in Russia.”/b> Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Rexford Tugwell (Now doesn’t that one send a chill up your spine?)
That was not a slip of the tongue either. In September 1995 Catherine Bertini, Executive Director of the United Nations World Food Program, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Agriculture, stated “Food is power. We use it to change behavior. Some may call that bribery. We do not apologize.” at the UN’s 4th World Conference on Women: Beijing, China.
On April 16, 1999 A veritable who’s who of corporate agribusiness writes a letter to Clinton about WTO meeting in Seattle: They want to establishment a three year goal, and a more effective set of trade rules for the agricultural sector
“In summary, we have record low grain inventories globally as we move into a new crop year. We have demand growing strongly. Which means that going forward even small crop failures are going to drive grain prices to record levels. As an investor, we continue to find these long term trends…very attractive.” Food shortfalls predicted: 2008
“Recently there have been increased calls for the development of a U.S. or international grain reserve to provide priority access to food supplies for Humanitarian needs. The National Grain and Feed Association (NGFA) and the North American Export Grain Association (NAEGA) strongly advise against this concept..Stock reserves have a documented depressing effect on prices… and resulted in less aggressive market bidding for the grains.” July 22, 2008 letter to President Bush

As world population expands, the demand for arable land should soar. At least that’s what George Soros, Lord Rothschild, and other investors believe
Shonda Warner… A Nebraska farm girl who went on to a globetrotting career as a derivatives trader for Goldman Sachs (GS, Fortune 500) [SEE: How Goldman Sachs Created the Food Crisis with a sparkling new casino of food derivatives.] and then as a hedge fund executive in London, [See When Hedge Funds Go Farming ] Warner, 45, is back on the farm pursuing what she believes is a huge moneymaking opportunity. Two years ago Warner launched an investment firm, called Chess Ag Full Harvest Partners, with a fairly simple underlying strategy: Buy undervalued farmland in the U.S. and profit from the coming global agriculture boom.
Last June she closed her first fund with $30 million from wealthy individuals and institutional investors such as the pension fund of Dow Chemical (DOW, Fortune 500). (See correction, below.) She says her ultimate goal is to take the company public as the first farmland-only real estate investment trust in the U.S. “The returns in agriculture haven’t looked sexy for a long time, but I think that’s about to change,” she says…. CNN Money 2009

This excerpt from The 2001 Issues for the Agricultural Talks and WTO Trade Round is truly ironic. Seems logic gets twisted to fit the facts so what else is new.

The un-scientific so-called “precautionary principle” is unfortunately being successfully and constantly misused as justification to immobilize science and its applications, as well as to confuse the public. ..The so-called principle, which is in fact a concept rather than a principle, is indeed a wonderful tool to avoid delicate political decision. .. the so-called precautionary principle – in reality a concept rather than a scientific principle – should not be used as a tool to stop innovation, even under the guise of a moratorium, which is what has happened in the EU today. There will always be scientific uncertainty in any scientific field and reasonable approaches to risk management must be adopted to manage this uncertainty. Prohibition must only be used as an extreme risk management tool. Abuses of the precaution concept to justify political positions, or to cloak distorting import restriction policies, should equally be avoided and expressively exposed. The European Commission’s recent white paper was helpful in clarifying the limits to be set on the use of the so-called “precautionary principle.”
The internationalization of the food chain demands that identification, registration, tracking and tracing systems also become internationalized. After 31 years with Monsanto, Mr. Auxenfans, retired from the Monsanto Corporation at the end of 1999 as the former Chief Operating Officer (COO) of the Agricultural Division, and its Chairman for the Europe-Africa operations. He is a member of the Board of Directors at both the IPC and the IAMA.

This statement by US bureaucrats sums up the attitude of our ‘government masters’:
In July 2000, USDA officials claimed in court hearing that,
“The farmers have no rights. No right to be heard before the court, no right to independent testing, and no right to question the USDA.” ~ Linda Faillace: Mad sheep
This was not a one off either.

FDA’s Response to FTCLDF Suit
…The agency has long opposed ‘freedom of food choice’ but its response to the FTCLDF complaint represents FDA’s strongest public statement yet on the freedom to obtain and consume the foods of one’s choice.
FDA’s Views on Freedom of Choice

* “Plaintiffs’ assertion of a new ‘fundamental right’ under substantive due process to produce, obtain, and consume unpasteurized milk lacks any support in law.” [p.17]
* “There is no absolute right to consume or feed children any particular food.” [p. 25]
* “There is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds.” [p. 26]
* Plaintiffs’ assertion of a ‘fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families’ is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.” [p. 26]
* “There is no fundamental right to freedom of contract.” [p. 27]

Did someone say that Americans are FREE?
It is a document obtained from the Department of Defence entiled: “AFSS 0910 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND TREATMENT INCIDENTS (EOTI) LESSON PLAN”
Subtitle Extremism

D. Extremist Ideologies
1. Introduction
• As noted, an ideology is a set of political beliefs about the nature of people and society. People who are committed to an ideology seek not only to persuade but to recruit others to their belief. In U.S. history, there are many examples of extremist ideologies and movements. The colonists who sought to free themselves from British rule and the Confederate states who sought to secede from the Northern states are just two examples.….
a. Nationalism – The policy of asserting that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations.….
d. Anarchism – A political ideology that considers the state to be unnecessary, harmful, or undesirable. National anarchists appeal to youths in part by avoiding the trappings of skinhead culture—light jackets, shaved heads, and combat boots—in favor of hooded sweatshirts and bandanas. They act the part of stereotypical anarchists as envisioned by most Americans outside of far-left circles: black-clad protesters wreaking havoc at political conventions and anti-globalization rallies.
e. Religion – Extremist ideology based on intolerance toward other religions. Anti-
Semitism is a prime example of this ideology.
f. Eco-Warriors – Environmental activist’s who take action to fight against the exploitation of the environment and/or animals. An eco-warrior can be someone non-confrontational, such as a tree-sitter, or someone who engages in direct action….

Nice to know the US military tosses the Founding Fathers into the same category as ” anti-globalization rallies” “Eco-Warriors” and Christians who might have a wee bit of a problem with a religion that destroys the twin towers in NYC and then wants to put up a victory symbol. It is even more interesting that the US MILITARY lists first under EXTREMISM:

a. Nationalism – The policy of asserting that the interests of one’s own nation are separate from the interests of other nations or the common interest of all nations.

No wonder they court martialed a young man who refused to take orders from the UN.Specialist Michael New, refused to wear a United Nations uniform and to serve under a foreign commander.
The USA, Canada and Australia of course are not the only countries losing their farmers.
January 8 2008 ~In the UK Defra has dropped the word ‘farming’ from its title. “Defra and the Treasury’s joint vision document of 2006 presented to the EU argued that supports for farming should be completely abandoned..”

Gail Combs
September 4, 2013 7:18 am

OOPS posted to wrong Article. It was supposed to go in The bull and the Borg

Leo Morgan
September 4, 2013 8:05 am

Or, as I phrased it at the time, “97% of Climate Scientists agree with Anthony Watts.”
I was making the same point then.

September 4, 2013 10:58 am

Haven’t seen any these people Obama, Davey and news organizations apologizing and correcting themselves. I don’t expect them to either, they’ll just continue to “keep on message”

Janice Moore
September 4, 2013 11:07 am

Gail Combs, GREAT POST (lol, where-EVER it is placed). #(:))

September 4, 2013 11:13 am

Anyone who cares about consensus is a politician, not a scientist. Science isn’t suppose to change with the weather, but consensus does. It is as fickle as the stock market, which goes up and down based on the consensus of investors. Would you make investment choices today based on a consensus of market experts from last year? Then why would you expect this year’s consensus of climate experts to be the same as next year’s? I have no doubt that if a survey on global warming was taken 4 times a year, they would find that the degree of consensus literally changes with the seasons. That’s not useful in science, only in politics, where today’s poll means everything. There are politicians masquerading as climate scientists, but their reliance on consensus gives them away.

Steve Obeda
September 4, 2013 5:33 pm

Whew. I’m not a backwards, science-hating, polar bear killing denier after all!

Verified by MonsterInsights