I guess there’s no “scientific consensus” as one former Vice-President would like us to believe.
Medical researcher Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte recently updated this research. Using the same database and search terms as Oreskes, he examined all papers published from 2004 to February 2007. The results have been submitted to the journal Energy and Environment, of which DailyTech has obtained a pre-publication copy. The figures are surprising.
Of 528 total papers on climate change, only 38 (7%) gave an explicit endorsement of the consensus. If one considers “implicit” endorsement (accepting the consensus without explicit statement), the figure rises to 45%. However, while only 32 papers (6%) reject the consensus outright, the largest category (48%) are neutral papers, refusing to either accept or reject the hypothesis. This is no “consensus.”
Emphasis mine. The “consensus” they’re referring to is man-made global warming. In 2004, history professor Naomi Oreskes looked into peer-reviewed papers published on the ISI Web of Science site. A majority endorsed the so-called consensus view that “humans were having at least some effect on global climate change”. Well, that research and those papers became outdated, some being 15 years old. That’s where Schulte came in.
The papers published between 2004 and 2007 show that just 7% gave an explicit endorsement of that “consensus”. Only a total of 45% came to the conclusion that man has a significant impact on climate change. The largest category of scientists don’t accept or reject the “consensus view”. As the column say, there is no consensus among scientists.
But we haven’t reached the most surprising point, yet. This is it:
The figures are even more shocking when one remembers the watered-down definition of consensus here. Not only does it not require supporting that man is the “primary” cause of warming, but it doesn’t require any belief or support for “catastrophic” global warming. In fact of all papers published in this period (2004 to February 2007), only a single one makes any reference to climate change leading to catastrophic results.
Be sure to catch Leonardo DiCaprio’s “11th Hour” documentary. In it, the actor shows how much of a significant impact humans have in global warming, and how the end of the healthy planet is very near. He apparently knows better than scientists. VOA News has this quote from a scientist, regarding Leo’s alarmist film:
“We (climatologists) know, I think to a pretty small range of error, how much it’s gonna warm in the next 20 to 50 years or so,” he says. “It’s not that much. It will be about eight tenths of a degree Celsius or so. To spin that into the end of the world story is absurd. It stands history on its head,” he notes.
Of course, to simply go after Leo wouldn’t be fair. Al Gore’s film An Inconvenient Truth quoted erroneous NASA data which previously had 1998 as the hottest year on record. After a revision of its data, NASA found 1934 to hold that honor. 5 of the 10 hottest years on record weren’t in the last 50 years, a couple coming during times of recession.