25-04-2008, 02:50 AM
|
#16 (permalink)
|
|
Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 176
|
Oreskes Study is debunked and worthless
Sun's Past Strength Took Toll On Tropical Glaciers, Worsens Today's Outlook ( Science Daily)
Sun's warming influence 'under-estimated' ( BBC)
Sunspots: correlations with temperature ( Luboš Motl, Ph.D. Theoretical Physicist, Harvard)
Surface Warming And The Solar Cycle ( Science Daily)
The Solar to Global Warming Connection ( Jim Goodridge, Retired State Climatologist)
The Sun Also Warms ( Sallie Baliunas, Ph.D. Astrophysics, Willie Soon Ph.D.)
The Sun's Chilly Impact On Earth ( Science Daily)
The Sun and Global Warming ( NASA)
The Sun Is More Active Now Than Over The Last 8000 Years ( Science Daily)
The truth about global warming - it's the Sun that's to blame ( The Daily Telegraph, UK)
Viewpoint: The Sun and climate change ( BBC)
Why So Hot? Don't Blame Man, Blame the Sun ( Sallie Baliunas, Ph.D. Astrophysics)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Clippo
Nancy Oreskes studies would be a good starting point.
|
Oreskes study has been debunked and is worthless.
RE: “The scientific consensus on climate change” ( Benny Peiser, The letter Science Magazine refused to publish)
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Benny Peiser
Oreskes claims to have analysed 928 abstracts she found listed on the ISI database using the keywords "climate change". However, a search on the ISI database using the keywords "climate change" for the years 1993 - 2003 reveals that almost 12,000 papers were published during the decade in question. [...] ...she admitted that there was indeed a serious mistake in her Science essay. According to Oreskes, her study was not based on the keywords "climate change," but on "global climate change" [yet her paper is clearly titled: The scientific consensus on "climate change" not "global climate change"] Her use of three keywords instead of two reduced the list of peer reviewed publications by one order of magnitude (on the UK's ISI databank the keyword search "global climate change" comes up with 1247 documents) [...] The results of my analysis contradict Oreskes' findings and essentially falsify her study: Of all 1117 abstracts, only 13 (1%) explicitly endorse the 'consensus view'. [...] 34 abstracts reject or doubt the view that human activities are the main drivers of the "the observed warming over the last 50 years". 44 abstracts focus on natural factors of global climate change."
|
|
|
|