Author: sansukong

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

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 09:47:24 |Display all floors
seneca Post time: 2013-5-20 09:41
?

So why did you of all detractors have to mislabel him as a "warmist"?

John Cook did not produce any revolutionary work.

Two other papers in 1994 and 2003 by others produced new identical results.


The difference is Cook's work is cited as authoritative in peer reviewed journals ...and very transparent methodology........................while Morano is a blogger with no work in scientific journals.
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 11:43:52 |Display all floors
seneca Post time: 2013-5-20 11:09
You are the researcher to make that apparent. Thanks!

Sans Souci has failed again!

rat has never been to university.


that is why rat don't know reliable sources from unreliable sources.

his thesis will always fail.
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 14:41:43 |Display all floors
Global Warming is a fact

Use magic tools Report

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 14:51:14 |Display all floors
Revolutionar Post time: 2013-5-20 08:47
John Cook did not produce any revolutionary work.

Two other papers in 1994 and 2003 by others pro ...
Two other papers in 1994 and 2003 by others produced new identical results.

Papers? What papers? By whom?  Do you know that, once upon a time, it was believed that the world was flat?

Translate  ....
期刊論文?什麼文件?誰?你知不知道,曾幾何時,有人認為地球是平的?



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 15:52:10 |Display all floors
sansukong Post time: 2013-5-20 14:51
Papers? What papers? By whom?  Do you know that, once upon a time, it was believed that the world ...

yes, rat will be flat once we can get our hands on rat.
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 15:56:41 |Display all floors
sansukong Post time: 2013-5-20 14:51
Papers? What papers? By whom?  Do you know that, once upon a time, it was believed that the world ...

Our ( the John Cook authors)  results are also consistent with previous research finding a 97% consensus amongst climate experts on the human cause of global warming.  Doran and Zimmerman (2009) surveyed Earth scientists, and found that of the 77 scientists responding to their survey who are actively publishing climate science research, 75 (97.4%) agreed that "human activity is a significant contributing factor in changing mean global temperatures."  Anderegg et al. (2010) compiled a list of 908 researchers with at least 20 peer-reviewed climate publications.  They found that:

"≈97% of self-identified actively publishing climate scientists agree with the tenets of ACC [anthropogenic climate change]"

In our survey, among scientists who expressed a position on AGW in their abstract, 98.4% endorsed the consensus.  This is greater than 97% consensus of peer-reviewed papers because endorsement papers had more authors than rejection papers, on average.  Thus there is a 97.1% consensus in the peer-reviewed literature, and a 98.4% consensus amongst scientists researching climate change.
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 16:09:34 |Display all floors
This post was edited by sansukong at 2013-5-20 16:09

Reposting missing post ......

Cook's unreported finding

May 17, 2013Climate: 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.




28 comments


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.