[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

97% of Scientists

The case of 97% of climate scientists agreeing that human beings are the
main cause of warming.

One of the main papers behind the 97 percent claim is authored by John Cook:

Quantifying the Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming in the
Scientific Literature

Here is Cook?s summary of his paper: ?Cook et al. (2013) found that over
97 percent [of papers he surveyed] endorsed the view that the Earth is
warming up and human emissions of greenhouse gases are the main cause.?

A quick scan of the paper reveals that this is not the case.

Cook is able to demonstrate only that a relative handful endorse ?the view
that the Earth is warming up and human emissions of greenhouse gases are
the main cause.? Cook calls this ?explicit endorsement with
quantification? (quantification meaning 50 percent or more). Only a small
percentage of the papers fall into this category; Cook does not say what
percentage but when the study was publicly challenged by economist David
Friedman, one observer calculated that only 1.6 percent explicitly stated
that man-made greenhouse gases caused at least 50 percent of global

Where did most of the 97 percent come from ?

Cook had created a category called ?explicit endorsement without
quantification? ? that is, papers in which the author, by Cook?s
admission, did not say whether 1 percent or 50 percent or 100 percent of
the warming was caused by man.

He had also created a category called ?implicit endorsement,? for papers
that imply (but don?t say) that there is some man-made global warming and
don?t quantify it. In other words, he created two categories that he
labeled as endorsing a view that they most certainly didn?t.

Scientists whose papers were classified by Cook protested:

?Cook survey included 10 of my 122 eligible papers. 5/10 were rated
incorrectly. 4/5 were rated as endorse rather than neutral.?

?Dr. Richard Tol

?That is not an accurate representation of my paper . . .?

?Dr. Craig Idso

?Nope . . . it is not an accurate representation.?

?Dr. Nir Shaviv

?Cook et al. (2013) is based on a strawman argument . . .?

?Dr. Nicola Scafetta

Think about how many times you hear that 97 percent or some similar figure
thrown around. It?s based on crude manipulation propagated by people whose
ideological agenda it serves.

And peep the core samples, son !