“so let’s talk about the 2013 study led by Australian researcher John Cook claiming there’s a 97 percent consensus on global warming.”
John Cook, on his website (which I won’t name) post pictures of himself dressed up as a Nazi.
Not hyperbole, not an exaggeration, not posted by one of his detractors. He’s taken them down. But you can still find his smiling face with the NAZI hat on all over the internet.
I sincerely doubt that figure.
However, there was a time when 97% of scientists believed in a Geocentric Universe.
Those advocating a Heliocentric Universe (which was STILL inadequate!) were treated as heretics.
So we “deniers” are in good company! :-)
Let’s be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus.There is no such thing as consensus science. If it’s consensus, it isn’t science. If it’s science, it isn’t consensus. Period.
‘But there’s a more fundamental problem with Cook’s 97 percent figure — consensus is not proof. [...] Trying to shut down dissent by arguing “well, all these smart people disagree with you” doesn’t prove anything.’
Exactly.
97% consensus = Fake News!
BS...it’s all about MONEY....certainly not benefitting the consumer....never....
Lord Monckton debunked this 97% figure years ago. The real consensus from the data used is .3% (that’s right, 1/3rd of pone percent). The 97% figure is entirely fake and always has been.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/09/09/97-climate-consensus-denial-the-debunkers-debunked/
I like these two lines from two of those asked to participate in the survey:
I’m not sure what you are trying to prove, but you will undoubtably be able to prove your pre-existing opinion with this survey!”
"This was a very simplistic and biased questionnaire
“Indeed, there are plenty of current examples of obvious “fake news” items that are embraced, and reinforced, by the mainstream media, other intellectuals, and academics. One is the oft-repeated claim that “97% of scientists believe in anthropogenic global warming” (AGW). This claim usually refers to a study (Cook et al., 2013) which surveyed a large sample of abstracts of scientific papers dealing with climate change. The majority of those papers expressed no opinion on AGW. Among the minority that did (33%), 97% accepted the view that human activity causes global warming. So not only does the study not survey the views of “scientists,” or even climate scientists, it simply shows that about a third of papers dealing with climate change over the last 20 years made the case for AGW. (See here for other studies claiming to come up with a similar figure.)
Another claim typically treated as factual is that one out of five US female college students is a victim of sexual assault. As Robby Soave has discussed in detail, this claim is based on a largely discredited study — a single study of one university — by psychologist David Lisak. As Soave shows, the study shows nothing of the kind, yet the one-in-five figure is consistently reported as fact by the major media.” Peter Klein
Ping.
A great question to pose to global warming believers after debunking the 97 % consensus myth is “Ask yourself, if they are lying about this then what other lies are global warming proponents telling you?”
Consensus among scientists is meaningless.
Science overturns consensus. That’s its function.
Only 97% took Obama’s Bribe
Global Hot Air
We are entering a mini ice age
Bm
Here at the New Jersey shore we were up to 70 a few days back, and hit 12 this morning. It’s now up to a lovely, sunny 31 and is supposed to be in the 60s by Wednesday. The phenomenon is called “weather”.