Bjorn Lomborg comments at Facebook on the Cook 97% survey. Has climate science gotten so bad that it is now resorting to utterly phony claims? Cook confirms that indeed it has.
Here’s what Lomborg writes (my emphasis, links shortened):
Ugh. Do you remember the “97% consensus”, which even Obama tweeted?
Turns out the authors don’t want to reveal their data.
It has always been a dodgy paper (iopscience.iop.org/article). Virtually everyone I know in the debate would automatically be included in the 97% (including me, but also many, much more skeptical)….
The paper looks at 12,000 papers written in the last 25 years (see here, the paper doesn’t actually specify the numbers, notalotofpeopleknowthat/).
It ditches about 8,000 papers because they don’t take a position. They put people who agree into three different bins — 1.6% that explicitly endorse global warming with numbers, 23% that explicitly endorse global warming without numbers and then 74% that “implicitly endorse” because they’re looking at other issues with global warming that must mean they agree with human-caused global warming.
Voila, you got about 97% (actually here 98%, but because the authors haven’t released the numbers themselves, we have to rely on other quantative assessments).
Notice, that *nobody* said anything about *dangerous* global warming; this meme simply got attached afterwards (by Obama and many others).
Now, Richard Tol has tried to replicate their study and it turns out they have done pretty much everything wrong. And they don’t want to release the data so anyone else can check it. Outrageous.
Read Tol’s letter to the Peter Høj, University of Queensland: ‘the main finding of the paper is incorrect, invalid and unrepresentative.’ (www.uq.edu.au/
It would be hilarious if it wasn’t so sad.
2013/08/ open-letter-to-vice-chancel lor-of.html.
4 responses to “Lomborg On Cook 974 Survey: “It Turns Out They Have Done Pretty Much Everything Wrong””
[…] what Lomborg writes (my emphasis, links shortened): . . .Click here to read the full article […]
That earlier 97 or 98% “study” was the same. These zealots belong to the cult, or they’re no starved for money they’ll say anything to get another easy government grant.
[…] red-faced for falling for such childish nonsense and then regurgitating it as if it were gospel. https://notrickszone.com/2013/08/28/l…rything-wrong/ http://richardtol.blogspot.co.uk/201…cellor-of.html I love how Cook and Queensland simply spit […]
Oreskes, Dorn, Cook. Same deal.
Their oft referred to 97% meme is just that. And nothing more. And most of the western world bought it, hook, line, and sinker.
Time and the observed data will settle this.
I remind readers of the 17th century dust up between the church and Copernicus and Galileo. The “consensus” was far greater than “97%” that the earth was the center of the universe. And we all know how that worked out.
Lomborg’s “The Skeptical Environmentalist” should be required reading before graduating high school. I disagree with him that CAGW is even a problem, but agree with his economic analysis that the proposed “solutions” are pure poison.