Author: sansukong

Warmist John Cook’s study exposed [Copy link] 中文

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-19 19:10:23 |Display all floors
This post was edited by Revolutionar at 2013-5-19 19:11
sansukong Post time: 2013-5-19 16:44
Am I given to understand that, being a CD poster and living in China gives you the right to subve ...

what does a jungle rat living in Malaysian jungles know about the needs of China?

what does it care?


equally  relevant is...................what is this Morano to China?
I've made my living, Mr. Thompson, in large part as a gambler. Some days I make twenty bets, some days I make none. There are weeks, sometimes months, in fact, when I don't make any bet at all because ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-19 22:00:33 |Display all floors
This post was edited by Revolutionar at 2013-5-19 22:02

aiyah......................no need John Cook la.



anyone who reads Science magazines regularly knows there is consensus among scientists.
..............that rats should be skewed and that Marc Morano, is a recognised fraud, a fake, a hack with no relevant qualifications.
I've made my living, Mr. Thompson, in large part as a gambler. Some days I make twenty bets, some days I make none. There are weeks, sometimes months, in fact, when I don't make any bet at all because ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 02:56:38 |Display all floors
seneca Post time: 2013-5-19 19:37
You have missed the John Cook study's thrust. It only quantifies what experts and scientists BELIE ...

I believe this is the same John Cook you were so reluctant to reveal his name in-spite of my persistent probing after you have made reference to one of his articles.
Translate  .....

我相信這是相同的 John Cook,你這麼不願意透露他的名字,
儘管的我的持久性探測您所做的之後,參考於,
一個 的他的文章。


FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 03:00:09 |Display all floors
sansukong Post time: 2013-5-20 02:56
I believe this is the same John Cook you were so reluctant to reveal his name in-spite of my persi ...

This post was edited by Revolutionar at 2013-5-19 22:02


aiyah......................no need John Cook la.



anyone who reads Science magazines regularly knows there is consensus among scientists.
..............that rats should be skewed and that Marc Morano, is a recognised fraud, a fake, a hack with no relevant qualifications.
I've made my living, Mr. Thompson, in large part as a gambler. Some days I make twenty bets, some days I make none. There are weeks, sometimes months, in fact, when I don't make any bet at all because ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 08:28:11 |Display all floors

RE: Warmist John Cook’s study exposed



The 97% consensus – a lie of epic proportions
Posted on May 17, 2013

Excerpt:
Here’s the genesis of the lie. When you take
a result of 32.6% of all papers that accept AGW, ignoring the 66% that don’t, and twist that into 97%, excluding any mention of that original value in your media reports, there’s nothing else to call it – a lie of presidential proportions.

FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 08:51:05 |Display all floors
This post was edited by sansukong at 2013-5-20 14:48

Cook's unreported finding
May 17, 2013 Climate: Sceptics

I really have been struggling to summon up much enthusiasm for the inanities of John Cook's paper, but Brandon Schollenberger has written an extraordinary analysis of the data, which really has to be seen to be believed. Readers are no doubt aware that the paper involves rating abstracts of a whole bunch of research papers to see where they stand on the global warming question.

The guidelines for rating [the] abstracts show only the highest rating value blames the majority of global warming on humans. No other rating says how much humans contribute to global warming. The only time an abstract is rated as saying how much humans contribute to global warming is if it mentions:

that human activity is a dominant influence or has caused most of recent climate change (>50%).

If we use the system’s search feature for abstracts that meet this requirement, we get 65 results. That is 65, out of the 12,000+ examined abstracts. Not only is that value incredibly small, it is smaller than another value listed in the paper:

Reject AGW 0.7% (78)

Remembering AGW stands for anthropogenic global warming, or global warming caused by humans, take a minute to let that sink in.  This study done by John Cook and others, praised by the President of the United States, found more scientific publications whose abstracts reject global warming than say humans are primarily to blame for it.

I'm speechless.

Read the whole thing.




FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 09:09:25 |Display all floors
Fact checking for the New York Times Editorial Board: Editorial claims ‘Climate warnings growing louder.’

Read the Full Article


Rebuttal to NYT: 'Global temperatures have not increased for 16 years and counting' -- 'Consequently, many peer-reviewed scientific papers have been published lowering the so-called 'climate sensitivity' to CO2 to a mere 0.5-1.6C per doubling of CO2, less than half of what was previously believed' -- 'Many peer-reviewed scientific papers have demonstrated that CO2 is greening the planet. One published last week noted an 11% increase in green cover over arid areas due to CO2 fertilization over the past 30 years' -- According to the NOAA 2012 sea level budget, sea levels are rising at a mere 1.1-1.3 mm/yr, less than 5 inches per century, less than the average rate of rise over the past 18,000 years. According to a paper published in the Journal of Climate by JM Gregory et al (with 14 other top international sea level experts) in Dec 2012, there is no evidence of an anthropogenic (man-made) influence on sea levels, and no evidence of any acceleration of sea level rise over the 20th century' -- 'According to a 20-year study published last week in Nature, warming of the Arctic may not release methane & CO2, carbon will remain locked in soil' -- 'The UN IPCC SREX report concluded that there is no evidence that warming is increasing extreme weather, droughts, floods, hurricanes, etc. and no evidence of a human fingerprint on such extremes. In fact, the data shows such extremes have decreased'




By: Marc Morano - Climate Depot       May 19, 2013 7:43 AM




FIRST NATIONS ( LAKOTA PEOPLE ) Heartbreaking - (Google Search for video) "to stay true to who you are. Never allow anyone make you different or think different about what it is you are created to be ...

Use magic tools Report

You can't reply post until you log in Log in | register

BACK TO THE TOP
Contact us:Tel: (86)010-84883548, Email: blog@chinadaily.com.cn
Blog announcement:| We reserve the right, and you authorize us, to use content, including words, photos and videos, which you provide to our blog
platform, for non-profit purposes on China Daily media, comprising newspaper, website, iPad and other social media accounts.