Analysis debunks 97% consensus claims: ‘The Myth of a Global Warming Consensus’
http://heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-myth-global-warming-consensus…
Press Ignores Harvard Prof Robert N. Stavins Alleging ‘Astonishing Interference’ in Latest IPCC Global Warming Report
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-blumer/2014/04/28/press-ignores-harvard-prof-alleging-astonishing-interference-latest-ipcc…
‘It turns out that 97% of IPCC scientists are actually government officials’ – UN IPCC Lead Author reveals ‘he was one of only two scientists present, surrounded by ‘45 or 50’ government officials’
http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/04/28/understanding-the-97-consensus/…
Warmist James Powell’ claim of overwhelming ‘consensus’ rebutted
http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2014/03/the-global-warming-nazis-are-getting.html
Geochemist James Lawrence Powell continues to claim, the only people still debating whether or not climate change is “real,” and caused by human activity, are the ones who aren’t doing the actual research.Well, I can tell Mr Powell that climate does change and has changed through all eternity so, to answer his first leg, “YES!” Climate Change is “real.”Is Climate Change caused by human activity. Well, also a qualified “YES!” The question Powell should ask is – “Are Humans’ emissions of carbon dioxide causing catastrophic global warming?” As there has been no significant warming for more than 17 years, the answer to this must be “NO!”Powell claims that he went through “every scientific study published in a peer-review journal during the calendar year 2013.” This blog before has answered and destroyed these outlandish claims and found them all lacking substance:0.3% Consensus; not 97.1%;Friends Of Science: 97% NON-CONSENSUS with CAGWNuccitelli and Dessler 97% wrong;The Consensus Myth: 97% of Nothing;97% of people quoting this figure are wrong:Could this be the new consensus;and many more……To check that he was on the right track, he could have done a check with the NIPCC. The NIPCC (“Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change”) is an international panel of nongovernment scientists and scholars who have come together to understand the causes and consequences of climate change from a sceptical viewpoint, looking at information which is routinely ignored by the official U.N. body, the IPCC.The NIPCC regularly reviewing the peer-reviews scientific literature and archives those reviews on their website. The second tranch of the NIPCC’s Climate Change Reconsidered (CCRll) will be launched Wednesday, April 9, 8:00 a.m. – 11:00 a.m. at National Press Club in Washington, DCGeochemist James Lawrence Powell says: “the only people still debating whether or not climate change is “real,” and caused by human activity, are the ones who aren’t doing the actual research.”If you look at the names behind the NIPCC ( they are found here) all are scientists who have done research and most if not all have published papers.Were their papers included in Powell’s “every scientific study published in a peer-review journal …”You can bet your sweet bippy they were NOT!
Sent by gReader Pro…
Journal admits Lewandowsky paper retracted because it failed. Twice!
…Controversial paper linking conspiracy theories to climate change skepticism formally retracted
Warmists attempt to create new 99.99% ‘consensus’ claim: ‘2,258 Meaningless Search Results’ – ‘Rebuttal to ‘2,258 peer-reviewed climate articles’
Warmists attempt to create new 99.99% ‘consensus’ claim: ‘2,258 Meaningless Search Results’ – ‘Rebuttal to “2,258 peer-reviewed climate articles” – ‘All that can be claimed is there were 2258 meaningless search results not “peer-reviewed climate articles” for a query of the ‘Web of Science’ database – with 1 chosen by strawman argument.’ — Powell padded his search results total by using the phrases; “global warming” and/or “global climate change” instead of “anthropogenicglobal warming” [man-made global warming] or “anthropogenicglobal climate change” [man-made global climate change], which would have significantly reduced the number of returned results. — Powell intentionally ignored actual skeptic arguments and failed to count many papers. Including a14-paper special edition on climate change in the IPCC cited journal, Energy & Environment (June 2013) — Powell continues in the trend of propaganda started by Oreskes (2004) which is considered useless by world renowned climate experts, “Analyses like these by people who don’t know the field are useless. A good example is Naomi Oreskes work.” – Tom Wigley, Fellow, American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) — Powell intentionally ignores actual skeptic arguments, which includes the 993-page NIPCC report, Climate Change Reconsidered II: Physical Science (2013) – supported entirely by the peer-reviewed literature and 1000+ Peer-Reviewed Papers Supporting Skeptic Arguments Against ACC/AGW Alarm. Instead he hopes his propaganda will be picked up by the media and used by those who are intellectual dishonest and want to be intentionally misleading.
Warmist claim: ‘9,135 out of 9,136 scientists believe climate change is happening’…
Pointman gives annual award: ‘CLIMATE PRAT OF 2013 – WE HAVE A WINNAH!’ ‘This year’s winner, is Dana Nuccitelli’
…