Posted on 01/13/2014 1:40:30 PM PST by llevrok
The next time you hear someone dispute that human activity is destabilizing our climate, remember this pie chart.
It represents geochemist James Lawrence Powell's review of 2,258 peer-reviewed scientific articles about climate change, written by 9,136 authors, published between Nov. 12, 2012 and December 31, 2013. Of all those hundreds of papers and thousands of researchers, Powell found one article, authored by a single scientist, that attributed climate change to something other than human actions: "The Role of Solar Activity in Global Warming," by S.V. Avakyan, appearing in the Herald of the Russian Academy of Science, Vol. 83, No. 3.
Powell, a past president of Oberlin, Franklin and Marshall, and Reed colleges, invites anyone to reproduce his survey of the science:
Anyone can repeat as much of the new study as they wish--all of it if they like. Download an Excel database of the 2,258 articles here. It includes the title, document number, and Web of Science accession number. Scan the titles to identify articles that might reject man-made global warming. Then use the DOI or WoS accession number to find and read the abstracts of those articles, and where necessary, the entire article.
I am reminded of Einstein’s comment when he was told that a pamphlet critiquing his theory of relativity had been published under the title “100 Authors Against Einstein”: “If I had been wrong, one would have been enough.”
Consensus doesn't necessarily equal "settled science"
At the beginning of the 16th century, a Polish scientist named Nicolaus Copernicus stood alone in his thesis that the sun, not the earth, was the center of the universe around which all other planets revolved. Not a single scientist, religious or political leader would stand by him.
Guess who turned out to be correct.
Popular Science Fiction
It looks like the chart from the early 20th century of scientists that thought that the Milky Way was the whole universe.
The one sliver would have been Edwin Hubble. Glad that we don’t do things based on pie charts.
Consensus doesn’t always equal “settled science” it usually means “this is the best guess we have so far with the measurements we have taken with our flawed measurement devices as of now”....
Sadly the measurements have been disagreeing with them for the last 10 years and they have been ignoring or dismissing the data due to the “orthodoxy of science” and the “preservation of ingrained science doctrine”...
I think Galileo would also have been in that very small slice.
This is the ultimate in stupidity. It is certainly true that most climate scientists agree that human activity results in some degree of global warming. The question is NOT if humans contribute to global warming. The real question is the extent to which human activity affects the climate. A further question is whether the resulting warming is catastrophic.
One of the major meteorological societies recently conducted a poll and found that just over 50% thought anthropogenic global warming was a problem.
They openly commit the logical fallacy of argumentum ad numerum. And either they’re too stupid to realize it, or they think we’re too stupid to realize it.
Then again, with the idiotic feminized sheeple, it’s all about conforming to the consensus. Majority rules, to them, in science, and don’t try to confuse them with the facts.
Who funded the pro side research?
CONSENSUS IS NOT SCIENCE. It’s political science
I was thinking the same thing.
PS has been promoting Popular Fantasy for a long time.
I don’t read PS anymore. They tend to echo the party line too much.
Since all the scientists agree, why not stop funding climate change research?
The dishonesty of the Warmists is breath-taking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.