Author: sansukong

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

Rank: 8Rank: 8

Post time 2013-5-20 18:04:46 |Display all floors

RE: Warmist John Cook’s study exposed

Climate Scientist Hans Von Storch Warns: Climate Scientists Have Been “Taking On The Roles Of Medicine Men And Priests”


By P Gosselin on 18. Mai 2013

                                                                                                                                                                              



What follows is a critical article written by Jens Meyer-Wellmann appearing in German national daily Die Welt that got by me a couple of weeks ago.

The title: “Scientists should not play priest…Climate scientist von Storch accuses his colleagues of spreading panic – and sees no major consequences coming from a dredging of the Elbe River“.

Sebastian Lüning’s and Fritz Vahrenholt’s blogsitewww.kaltesonne.de presented an excerpt of the Die Welt article, which I’ve translated in English:

Unfortunately in climate science there is a tendency to proclaim absolute truths and to link these immediately to instructions on actions to take,’ von Storch said. ‘The climate pope tells us what has to be done, and for the people it’s: keep your mouths shut. Scientists have been taking over the roles of medicine men and priests. That’s not the job of scientists. Science is supposed to help understand problems, show the possibilities that exist in dealing with them. The best is to show many possibilities. Then the political process has to decide the path to take.’

But some of his colleagues in science like to use ‘stories that point to a catastrophe,’ said the professor of meteorology. One example was the assumption that our region would see ‘murderous violent storms’. But there was no data showing this. ‘It all has a cultural, anthropological background’ . ‘If you sin, then you will be punished. And the punishment always takes on an environmental dimension which also included storms in the past. In former times it was God’s punishment. Today it’s punishment by Nature. Nature is to keep man in check. And for this we see idiotic films like ‘The Day After Tomorrow.’’

With ‘snappy’ and short statements like ‘snow will be a thing of the past’, the loud speakers among the scientists are putting the credibility of science at stake.’”

More info on Hans von Storch here. He also runs the climate blog klimazwiebel.de and is co-author of the recently released book: The Climate Trap: The Dangerous Proximity of Politics and Climate Science.

Graphic: Rembrandt depiction of prophet Moses, public domain work.



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 18:38:01 |Display all floors




All the cut and paste from the work of crooks and paid propagandists do not make a Rat into a scholar.









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 2013-5-21 08:00:56 |Display all floors
Reposting missing post .....

Consensus and controversy

Posted on May 6, 2013 | 420 Comments
by Judith Curry
In open societies where both scientists and the general public are equipped with critical skills and the tools of inquiry, not least enabled by the information revolution provided through the Internet, the ethos of science as open, questioning, critical and anti-dogmatic should and can be defended also by the public at large. Efforts to make people bow uncritically to the authority of a dogmatic representation of Science, seems largely to produce ridicule, opposition and inaction, and ultimately undermines the legitimacy and role of both science and politics in open democracies.


Note to voice_cd,
The missing of my threads and postings has become a regular basis. Has China completely lost its control over CD to foreign control? Like Diaoyudao, China can only have her ships sailing around but off the islands; but yet claims that those  islets are its sovereignity. The Chinese authorities have let this happen, in the similar fashion to CD. Is there really a comspircy? How sad!




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 2013-5-21 12:42:01 |Display all floors
sansukong Post time: 2013-5-21 08:00
Reposting missing post .....

Consensus and controversy

consensus..........................that consensus is that Rat and Morano are human squeeze.

yan cha.

worse than the devil.
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 2013-5-21 13:05:41 |Display all floors

RE: Warmist John Cook’s study exposed


Confirmed: 68% of Recent Peer Reviewed Studies Reject Catastrophic Global Warming Disaster Predictions






                                                                                                                        

Per the tallies of peer reviewed abstracts (some 12,000), it is readily apparent that the vast majority of studies (68%) have failed to endorse catastrophic global warming - the classical alarmists' fear-mongering of climate change disasters. Or to put it another way, only 32% of the studies embrace (maybe?) the potential of catastrophic global warming science and its conjecture of an increased likelihood of disasters.The above is the result of a new analysis of recent peer reviewed papers  conducted by John Cook, founder of the 'Skeptical Science' blog. His analysis determined the following:"They examined “11,944 climate abstracts from 1991–2011 matching the topics ‘global climate change’ or ‘global warming’. We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW, 32.6% endorsed AGW, 0.7% rejected AGW and 0.3% were uncertain about the cause of global warming."In another analysis of the same data, Marcel Crok determined essentially the same, which is shown in the above table on the right. Yet he concludes with the following:

                          
"Cook’s survey not only meaningless but also misleading"     

Other informed experts on the global warming science debate are coming to the same conclusion (here, here, here and here).Objectively, the John Cook analysis has quickly become a farcical flop. As many are pointing out, the peer reviewed tallies can be interpreted in many different ways, and by the way, using the abstracts of peer reviewed studies is a pretty lame excuse for an even more lame "science by authority" consensus claim.The above left 'C3' interpretation of Cook's analysis is an example of just how flexible one can be when using his moronic study.

May 20, 2013 at 03:54 PM





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 2013-5-21 14:02:22 |Display all floors
Climate Denial's Death Knell: 97 Percent of Peer-Reviewed Science Confirms Manmade Global Warming, Consensus Overwhelming







A new survey conducted by a team of volunteers at Skeptical Science has definitively confirmed the scientific consensus in climate science literature -97 percent of peer-reviewed papers agree that global warming is happening and human activities are responsible.  

It does not get any clearer than this. It should finally put to rest the claims of climate deniers that there is a scientific debate about global warming. Of course, this bunch isn't known for being reasonable or susceptible to facts. But maybe the mainstream media outlets that have given deniers a megaphone will finally stop.

The peer-reviewed survey, Quantifying the consensus on anthropogenic global warming in the scientific literature, was published today in the peer-reviewed Environmental Research Letters, a publication of the Institute of Physics (IOP).

The citizen science team looked at some 12,000 peer-reviewed climate science papers and found a 97% consensus that humans are causing global warming. The work expanded upon an earlier survey of the literature by Naomi Oreskes, published in 2004, as well as an informal review conducted by James Powell, published onDeSmogBlog in November 2012.

Lead author John Cook created a short video summarizing the findings of the new survey:

Head over to TheConsensusProject.com and follow their Twitterfor further updates.

As John Cook explains, there is a significant gap between this overwhelming consensus among scientists and the public's perception. According to polling data, only about half the public understands the scientific consensus on global warming. Yet surveys of the peer-reviewed literature are crystal clear on the consensus:

Co-author Dana Nuccitelli explains the findings on the consensus:


Based on our abstract ratings, we found that just over 4,000 papers expressed a position on the cause of global warming, 97.1% of which endorsed human-caused global warming. In the self-ratings, nearly 1,400 papers were rated as taking a position, 97.2% of which endorsed human-caused global warming.

We found that about two-thirds of papers didn't express a position on the subject in the abstract, which confirms that we were conservative in our initial abstract ratings.  This result isn't surprising for two reasons: 1) most journals have strict word limits for their abstracts, and 2) frankly, every scientist doing climate research knows humans are causing global warming. There's no longer a need to state something so obvious. For example, would you expect every geological paper to note in its abstract that the Earth is a spherical body that orbits the sun?

Of course, the usual disinformers like Anthony Watts, Steve Milloy and the Blackboard blowhards didn't even have the decency to observe the embargo on this news, and immediately began foaming at the mouth as usual. I won't give their efforts any link love, but you can go there if you wish.

More importantly, please spread the word about this new study far and wide so that the public gap in understanding can shrink to the point where we can actually move forward with solutions to stem the tide.

As we flirt with 400ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere, the clock is ticking and there's no time to waste.






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 2013-5-21 14:18:03 |Display all floors
sansukong Post time: 2013-5-21 13:05
Confirmed: 68% of Recent Peer Reviewed Studies Reject Catastrophic Global Warming Disaster Predicti ...

want to know what the John Cook Report says?

Go to the source


too lazy or is that just You?
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

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.