Because the data behind the man-made global warming hypothesis is turning out to be so frail and flakey, we often hear the proponents claiming “97% of climate scientists agree that man is now driving the climate” as an argument.
Never mind the 97% figure is a bogus one to start with.
Whenever the data basis underpinning a theory is a shambles, then claims of consensus among experts are often the last go-to argument in a bid to salvage the theory. This is not only true in climate science, but also in the science of nutrition and heart disease.
Dr. Tim Noakes has posted a video on the horrible misconceptions involving the once highly ballyhooed high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet. For some 40 years 99% of the experts claimed the diet was good for our hearts and health. Saturated fat was villainized by junk science cranked out by a less-than honest-vegetable oil industry.
So what does Tim Noakes think of consensus in science?
At the 10:16 mark we hear something us man-made global warming skeptics can truly relate to (and AGW proponents can’t stand hearing). It’s why the argument of “consensus among experts” is in fact just the last gasp of a dying scientific theory and so must never be accepted. He tells his audience:
So, these are consensus guidelines. And you must never trust consensus guidelines because they are anti-science. Science is not about consensus; it’s about disproof, disbelief and skepticism. It’s not about consensus. When you have consensus, you got trouble.”
Of course there are are some not-so-bright readers out there who will claim that a few lumps of sugar does not disprove “climate science”. Of course it doesn’t. But what it does show, however, is that consensus among scientists does not make the science right – no matter how broad it is. Scientific consensus is often totally wrong. This we now seeing in the case in the high-carb, low-fat diet, and it it is also becoming clear that it is also the case with CO2 and climate.
Just think for a moment of all the major factors warmists currently deny within the science itself, everything from the models being wrong, the 18-year pause, the sun’s impact on climate cycles, the oceanic cycles, the Medieval Warm Period, etc.
Also in the case of climate science, “follow the money”.
Also do note that despite the overwhelming evidence and huge success of Dr. Noakes in treating obesity, there continue to be the stubborn diehard stalwarts of the old theory – desperately clinging to it to the very end. It doesn’t matter what massive evidence gets presented to them, they’ll continue denying, denying, denying.
Myself I can confirm what Dr. Noakes professes. I’ve been on a low-carb, high-fat diet for some one and half years and have seen a huge difference in health.