AMS-climate-survey-bar-chart

New AMS survey busts the 97% climate consensus claim

Fully a third don’t agree that man is the primary driver Another survey of 4,092 members of the American Meteorological Society (AMS) from George Mason University (home of Shukla and the RICO20) on climate change attitudes in that organization was released yesterday. However, the survey itself is tainted with the stench of the RICO20 and their…

97_percent_busted

97 Articles Refuting The ‘97% Consensus’ on global warming

The 97% “consensus” study, Cook et al. (2013) has been thoroughly refuted in scholarly peer-reviewed journals, by major news media, public policy organizations and think tanks, highly credentialed scientists and extensively in the climate blogosphere. The shoddy methodology of Cook’s study has been shown to be so fatally flawed that well known climate scientists have…

clip_image004.png

If 97% of Scientists Say Global Warming is Real, 100% Say It Has Nearly Stopped

John Cook’s methodology proves that there is a “pause consensus”. Guest essay by Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger and Patrick J. Michaels, Center for the Study of Science, Cato Institute The central premise of “global warming” is that human greenhouse-gas emissions will lead to a rise in the earth’s average surface temperature, and that as emissions…

97_percent_busted

New paper: Fraud, Bias & Public Relations – The 97% ‘Consensus’ And Its Critics

Claims of 97% consensus on global warming depend on research described as fraudulent and biased London, 8 September: A new briefing note published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation examines claims made by a great many commentators across the world, including President Obama and Ed Davey, of an overwhelming consensus on climate change. These depend on research…

Swedish farmers reject the 97% climate change consensus

From ScienceNordic: Researchers the world over almost unanimously agree that our climate is changing … But many farmers – at least Swedish ones – have experienced mild winters and shifting weather before and are hesitant about trusting the scientists. The researcher who discovered the degree of scepticism among farmers was surprised by her findings. Therese…

The disagreement over what defines ‘endorsment of AGW’ by Cook et al. is revealed in raters remarks, and it sure isn’t a 97% consensus

The Cook ratings document contains some incredible remarks, one of which is documented here.  According to it, “the training period in the initial stages of the rating period” covered more than half the ratings they did.  What kind of training period covers half of your project?! Guest post by Brandon Schollenberger Last month, I highlighted…

Surprise! No 97% consensus down under

Marc Hendrickx tips me to this story in the Australian: Earth scientists split on climate change statement AUSTRALIA’S peak body of earth scientists has declared itself unable to publish a position statement on climate change due to the deep divisions within its membership on the issue.

The myth of the 97% climate change consensus

What is the origin of the false belief – constantly repeated by President Obama, the media and others – that almost all scientists agree about global warming? Claims continue to be made that “97% of scientists agree that climate change is real, man-made and dangerous.” That’s what Secretary of State John Kerry told graduating Boston…

Friday Funny – 97% sticky science

Josh writes: There is so much to cartoon this week it is difficult to choose what to start with. I went for Brandon’s brilliant 97% data discovery. Apparently all you need to do if you want to be part of the 97% consensus that global warming is a real and present danger is just add…

97% of pictures are worth 1000 climate words

Guest essay by By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley The Guardian, one of the fastest-collapsing “legacy” news media in Britain, is bleeding circulation more rapidly than almost any other national newspaper. One reason, perhaps, is that on the question of the climate it has long ceased to be even remotely credible. A recent piece by Ketan…

An oopsie in the Doran/Zimmerman 97% consensus claim

David Burton writes: I just realized the obvious answer to a question that has been nagging in the back of my mind for nearly a year and a half. In 2008 Margaret Zimmerman asked two questions of 10,257 Earth Scientists at academic and government institutions. 3146 of them responded. That survey was the original basis for…

The 97% consensus myth – busted by a real survey

We’ve all been subjected to the incessant “97% of scientists agree …global warming…blah blah” meme, which is nothing more than another statistical fabrication by John Cook and his collection of “anything for the cause” zealots. As has been previously pointed out on WUWT, when you look at the methodology used to reach that number, the…

Join my crowd-sourced complaint about the ‘97% consensus’

By Christopher Monckton of Brenchley Three-quarters (rounded up to 97.1%) of all commenters expressing an opinion on my recent post about Dana Nuccitelli’s attempt at ex-post-facto justification of the false assertion in the lamentable Cook et al. paper of a non-existent 97.1% “scientific consensus” that turned out on peer-reviewed inspection to be 0.3%, enjoyed the…

The IPCC’s new certainty is 95% What? Not 97%??

Just 2% short of the magic 97% number, I’m sure the SkS kidz will be devastated. From Reuters: Drafts seen by Reuters of the study by the U.N. panel of experts, due to be published next month, say it is at least 95 percent likely that human activities – chiefly the burning of fossil fuels…

Global Warming theory has failed all tests, so alarmists return to the ‘97% consensus’ hoax

 Guest essay by Joseph D’Aleo, CCM, Weatherbell Analytics National Academies of Science defines a scientific theory as “a well-substantiated explanation of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses.” Dr Richard Feynman, Cornell Physicist in a lecture explained how theorys that failed the test of data or experiment are falsified (“wrong”)…

The madness of 97% 98% consensus herds

UPDATE: comments welcome on Dr. Richard Tol’s draft paper on this issue, see below. This will be a top post for a day, new posts will appear below this one – Anthony “Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover…

Tol statistically deconstructs the 97% Consensus

Dr. Richard Tol has been tweeting a statistical destruction of the “97% consensus” study, Cook et al. (2013) by educating co-author Dana Nuccitelli as to why his “sample” is not representative. “In his defense, [Dana] has had limited exposure to stats at uni” – Richard Tol

The 97% consensus paper is starting to fall apart

Two developments suggest that Cook et al 2013 Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature may be soon be headed for “retraction watch”, since serious problems with the data are becoming evident, which when accounted for bring the 97% consensus figure into question. First, there are new issues with the search…