Posted on 02/03/2015 7:20:44 AM PST by dennisw
I have brought my previous study (see here and here) up-to-date by reviewing peer-reviewed articles in scientific journals over the period from Nov. 12, 2012 through December 31, 2013. I found 2,258 articles, written by a total of 9,136 authors. (Download the chart above here.) Only one article, by a single author in the Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences, rejected man-made global warming. I discuss that article here.
My previous study, of the peer-reviewed literature from 1991 through Nov. 12, 2012, found 13,950 articles on “global warming” or “global climate change.” Of those, I judged that only 24 explicitly rejected the theory of man-made global warming. The methodology and details for the original and the new study are described here.
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. If you find any candidates that I missed, please email me here.
The scientific literature since 1991 contains a mountain of evidence confirming man-made global warming as true and no convincing evidence that it is false. Global warming denial is a house of cards.
(Excerpt) Read more at desmogblog.com ...
.
You’ve blown your cover here; will you sign up as a new boy now?
.
.
As I said, the peer of a fool is just another fool.
.
1. Peter Gabriel
2. Gene Pitney
3. Infinite answers
What’s the use of mysteries in the universe if they can be answered (an enumerated) in one post?
Is the only wise thing to call everybody else a fool?
Everybody?
How strong or long is your rubber band?
The GW gang did themselves in a long time ago.
All I have done is point it out.
.
There is the old gospel maxim that you are judged with the measure you judge others; and everyone is not yet cognizant of all their own faults.
I would not call it wise to go around stabbing in an ad hominem manner.
Of course if you continue, God shall have a say.
Disprove man made global warming?
Umm, isn’t that like proving a negative? Didn’t I learn in Logic 101 that that can’t be done?
But why bother? The current temperatures are within known variations from history, such as the Roman warm period and the Medieval warm period. Why don’t you prove the England was not a famous wine-growing region in Roman times? Or that Greenland was not green enough for farming during early Viking times?
And not by making stuff up, like CO2-causes-warming computer programs.
I continue to be amazed that people don’t look a history and just laugh warmists out of town.
He tries to argue that we are in dire times (climate wise) and yet cracks ‘wise’ when asked what the ideal is (so we will know how far off course we are or are headed).
Scientists are stupid. Historians rock!!!! Historians should have corrected the scientists who discovered the Greenhouse Effect (in the lab), then we’d have no debate today!!!!
Did I pinch one of your nerves?
Do you actually disagree with that statement?
We are awash in squads of high-five’n back slappin fools that try to assert man’s mastery over Yehova’s creation. I hope you’re not one of them?
.
There is enough information to declare warmism implausible, or at least no more so than coolism. What is staggering is the superficiality of the research. A humble soul would confess insufficient resources to answer the question of climate prediction, but far more resources to investigate how humanity could adapt if the global climate in fact does change.
Yes, it is annoying to see you dress sin as righteousness. I mean in your own power mind you, not that of Christ.
Be angry and do not sin. The moment you verge into sin, you vitiate whatever good you may have intended. “It’s their fault” is not a sin excuser.
When the “peers” stop accepting money indirectly from those who profit greatly from carbon exchanges and taxes (kickbacks) from climate change legislation their words will have more integrity.
Until then they are just greedy, ignorant pawns.
And look at what you just said. The error at hand here isn’t to assert man’s mastery over God’s creation. That is a grandiose accusation in your own soul. The error is to worry overly about the danger of messing it up, and some Christians do that as well as some atheists. There is a difference here. It underestimates God’s grace.
You really look like a self righteous prick.
.
>> “Historians should have corrected the scientists who discovered the Greenhouse Effect (in the lab)...” <<
.
Err, exactly when was that???
The “greenhouse effect” was discovered in a propagandist’s imagination.
.
At various times a huge majority of reputable scientists accepted phlogiston and phrenology and rejected germ theory and Relativity.,
.
I should have known your motive, silly me.
.
I may be the only conservative environmentalist (and environmental scientist) on the planet. That being said, I don’t know very many conservatives.
Yes, the earth heats and cools on it’s own. This is accounted for in the radiation budget calcs.
It is known, Khaleesi.
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.