A statistically representative climate change debate

the 97% is all bullshit... propaganda...


here are 1350 papers which support the no proof of agw / skeptic / denier side...

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html#Preface


Preface: The following papers support skeptic arguments against Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) or ACC/AGW Alarm [Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) or Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming (DAGW)].

ACC/AGW Alarm: (defined), "concern relating to a perceived negative environmental or socio-economic effect of ACC/AGW, usually exaggerated as catastrophic."

Disclaimer: The inclusion of a paper in this list does not imply a specific personal position to any of the authors. While certain authors on the list cannot be labeled skeptics (e.g. Harold Brooks, Roger Pielke Jr., Roger Pielke Sr.) their paper(s) or results from their paper(s) can still support skeptic's arguments against ACC/AGW Alarm. Various papers are mutually exclusive and should be considered independently. This list will be updated and corrected as necessary.

This is a resource for skeptics not a list of skeptics.

Counting Method: Only peer-reviewed papers are counted. Supplemental papers are not counted but listed as references in defense of various papers, these are italicized and proceeded by an asterisk ( * ) so they are not confused with the counted papers.

Supplemental papers include (but are not limited to): * Addendums, Comments, Corrections, Discussions, Erratum, Rebuttals, Rejoinders, Replies, Responses, Supplemental Material, Updates and Submitted papers.

This is a dynamic list that is routinely updated. When a significant new number of peer-reviewed papers is added the list title will be updated with the new larger number. The list intentionally includes an additional 10+ peer-reviewed papers as a margin of error at all times, which gradually increases between updates. Thus the actual number of peer-reviewed papers on the list can be much greater than stated.

Criteria for Inclusion: All counted papers must be peer-reviewed, published in a peer-reviewed journal and support a skeptic argument against ACC/AGW or ACC/AGW Alarm.



Ricter said:
Perhaps the 41 are those which attribute ALL of the recent warming to Man... ?
More...
 
jem said:
the 97% is all bullshit... propaganda...


here are 1350 papers which support the no proof of agw / skeptic / denier side...

http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html#Preface


Preface: The following papers support skeptic arguments against Anthropogenic Climate Change (ACC), Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) or ACC/AGW Alarm [Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) or Dangerous Anthropogenic Global Warming (DAGW)].

ACC/AGW Alarm: (defined), "concern relating to a perceived negative environmental or socio-economic effect of ACC/AGW, usually exaggerated as catastrophic."

Disclaimer: The inclusion of a paper in this list does not imply a specific personal position to any of the authors. While certain authors on the list cannot be labeled skeptics (e.g. Harold Brooks, Roger Pielke Jr., Roger Pielke Sr.) their paper(s) or results from their paper(s) can still support skeptic's arguments against ACC/AGW Alarm. Various papers are mutually exclusive and should be considered independently. This list will be updated and corrected as necessary.

This is a resource for skeptics not a list of skeptics.

Counting Method: Only peer-reviewed papers are counted. Supplemental papers are not counted but listed as references in defense of various papers, these are italicized and proceeded by an asterisk ( * ) so they are not confused with the counted papers.

Supplemental papers include (but are not limited to): * Addendums, Comments, Corrections, Discussions, Erratum, Rebuttals, Rejoinders, Replies, Responses, Supplemental Material, Updates and Submitted papers.

This is a dynamic list that is routinely updated. When a significant new number of peer-reviewed papers is added the list title will be updated with the new larger number. The list intentionally includes an additional 10+ peer-reviewed papers as a margin of error at all times, which gradually increases between updates. Thus the actual number of peer-reviewed papers on the list can be much greater than stated.

Criteria for Inclusion: All counted papers must be peer-reviewed, published in a peer-reviewed journal and support a skeptic argument against ACC/AGW or ACC/AGW Alarm.
More...

So these are papers on the other tail of the distribution, the one where it's argued Man has NO influence on the recent warming. That leaves about 8k papers somewhere in the middle?
 
Another way of looking at it examining how many papers were from the AGW denial position.

Powell-Science-Pie-Chart.png
 
Another way of looking at it is how many scientific organizations of national or international standing reject the fact of man made global warming.

Here is the list of them:
 
that is obviously bullshit... because I just linked to 135o papers challenging man made global warming by co2.

and because in the past... when I looked this up... in there were only 41 papers supporting your position.

I linked to that info a few pages back. .3% of the papers state that man made co2 causes warming...
and most of those papers were old and were using now failed computer models.



futurecurrents said:
Another way of looking at it examining how many papers were from the AGW denial position.

Powell-Science-Pie-Chart.png
More...
 
I do not know... its all really a baloney opinion argument as there is no such thing as a scientific consensus without any science showing man made co2 causes warming.

Ricter said:
So these are papers on the other tail of the distribution, the one where it's argued Man has NO influence on the recent warming. That leaves about 8k papers somewhere in the middle?
More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top