From the Carnegie Institution and the mind of Ken Caldeira, comes this “back to the future” style impossible to verify prediction (at least impossible now). Of course, in model-world and Hollywood, anything is provable possible. Climate change: Fast out of the gate, slow to the finish the gate Washington, D.C.— A great deal of research…
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…
By Bjørn Lomborg (via his Facebook page) About a quarter of all deaths in the developing world comes from mostly easily curable, infectious diseases. The biggest environment problem, by far measured in human deaths, is air pollution. Global warming, which creates a lot of attention, is on an entirely different and smaller level. The World Health…
From the Carnegie Institution , where soda pop science is like a carbonic acid trip, they say (thanks to modeling) we have to make big changes: “To save coral reefs, we need to transform our energy system…” while equating natural dissolution of CO2 into seawater with carbonation of soda pop, done under pressure and reduced…
Also, it appears the opinion of ONE board member is all it takes, so much for consensus. Richard Toll provides this communication:
Tonight, I’m surprised to find that Gleick, who stole documents under a false identity, and then likely forged a fake memo sent to MSM outlets is apparently still on the editorial review board of the Institute of Physics (IOP), Environmental Research Letters (ERL) which published the now discredited Cook et al. 97% consensus paper. See…
In the SkS forum discussion about how to create this 97% consensus paper, there was a lot of discussion about how to market it. As far as methodology, quality control, etc. goes, not so much, which just goes to show that Cook et al. 2013 was little more than a marketing ploy under the guise…
Guest essay by Christopher Monckton of Brenchley Environmental Research Letters ought to have known better than to publish the latest anti-scientific propaganda paper by John Cook of the dubiously-named Skeptical Science website. Here are just a few of the solecisms that should have led any competent editor or reviewer to reject the paper: It did…
Guest post by Marcel Crok A few months ago we made the launch of the international discussion platform . This week we start the third dialogue about the (added) value of regional climate models. We have three excellent participants joining this discussion: Bart van den Hurk of KNMI in The Netherlands who is actively involved…
You have to wonder how somebody can write (let alone read) the claims made here in the press release by Cook with a straight face. It gives a window into the sort of things we can expect from his borked survey he recently foisted on climate websites which seems destined to either fail, or get…