Skeptical Science

Thu, 2014-10-02 00:56Brendan Montague
Brendan Montague's picture

Time to Teach Lord Leach About Climate Science!

DeSmoggers asked to teach Lord Leach the errors of climate denial scientists S Fred Singer and Richard Lindzen and help stem the funding to the Global Warming Policy Foundation.

Libertarian banker Lord Leach is a stalwart ‘spiritual’ supporter of Lord Lawson’s Global Warming Policy Foundation who has been influenced by climate deniers S Fred Singer and Richard Lindzen.

In a long and sprawling speech in the House of Lords the GWPF backer sets out his doubts about the established science of climate change. He echoes some of the economic arguments developed by the Institute of Economic Affairs and Lord Lawson against climate change mitigation.

Wed, 2013-05-29 07:23Ben Jervey
Ben Jervey's picture

Enemies of Science Want to Confuse You About The 97-Percent Consensus Study

Earlier this month, John Cook of Skeptical Science and his team of volunteers at the Consensus Project released the latest definitive study of global warming scientific consensus, revealing that 97 percent of peer-reviewed papers with a clear view on the subject agree that global warming is occurring and that humans are the primary cause.

Ever since, we've seen the predictable pushback from fossil fuel industry apologists and climate deniers.

The loudest response comes from the Alberta-based Friends of Science, a shadowy non-profit with a history of Canadian oil company ties, which DeSmogBlog has covered extensively over the years.

From their press release:

Wed, 2013-05-15 16:01Brendan DeMelle
Brendan DeMelle's picture

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 on DeSmogBlog 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 Twitter for further updates.

Thu, 2013-01-10 17:14Brendan DeMelle
Brendan DeMelle's picture

Skeptical Science Video Debunks "No Warming for 16 Years" Denialist Claim

The talented team at Skeptical Science produced the video below to debunk the well-worn denialist argument that there's been “no warming for 16 years” - a favorite lie of Lord Christopher Monckton and many other anti-science crusaders. It's fantastic, and deserves to be spread far and wide to anyone who is confused about this.

Watch

Thu, 2012-12-13 23:08Graham Readfearn
Graham Readfearn's picture

Major IPCC Report Draft Leaked Then Cherry-Picked By Climate Sceptics

A CLIMATE sceptic blogger Alec Rawls has taken it upon himself to leak the current draft of an entire major Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report, which is not due for publication until September next year.

For those not au fait with the machinations of the IPCC (I mean, what do you lot do all day?) historically this United Nations organisation has produced reports every five years or so which pull together and summarise all the scientific research into climate change.

The next one - Assessment Report 5 - will begin to be published next year. They're undeniably important reports because practically every government on the face of the earth has used them to help inform their policies and their position domestically and internationally on climate change.

The AR5 comes via three working groups. WG1 looks at the physical science on climate change and its report will be first out of the traps in September 2013. WG2 looks at climate change impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and comes out in March 2014. WG3 looks at ways to mitigate climate change and comes out in October 2014.

But back to the leak.

Tue, 2011-11-22 11:53Brendan DeMelle
Brendan DeMelle's picture

East Anglia SwiftHack Email Nontroversy Returns: What You Need To Know

The desparate attempt by climate change deniers to sully climate scientists returns today with the release of 5,000 emails stolen back in 2009 during the original “Climategate” hacking of the University of East Anglia's Climatic Research Unit email servers. 

Other than a great attempt at ruining another Thanksgiving holiday for American scientists, the bottom line conclusions on this story are identical to the 2009 release: 

1. There is nothing in these emails that in any way disproves the enormous body of peer-reviewed climate science. As even the Koch-funded BEST study recently showed, climate change is real, global temperatures are rising and human activities are responsible.

2. The 'new' emails appear to come from the same batch stolen from the University of East Anglia in 2009.  The denialosphere blogs are trying to frame it as ‘Climategate 2’. Cherry-picked quotes from the emails are once again being taken out of context by skeptic bloggers and irresponsible media like the Daily Mail in a last ditch attempt to smear climate science, and derail COP17 talks in Durban.

3. It's not a coincidence that this new release of hacked emails comes just days before the Durban COP17 climate conference, much as the first release from the hacked files came just before Copenhagen. When the world’s governments start to make progress toward climate action, the polluters panic and resort to desparate measures.

4. Remember that this was an illegal hacking of emails, and this second batch represents a continued breach of privacy of these scientists whose personal emails were released to the public.  The UK police investigation into the hacking is still ongoing, and this new episode should compel them to redouble their efforts to find out who these criminal hackers are, and bring them to justice.

Update: Richard Black at the BBC points to the real scandal that needs further investigation - why the UK police have done such an astonishly poor job investigating this criminal hacking, as evidenced by their tiny expenditures to date. From Climate Emails, Storm or Yawn?

I have been passed information stemming from an FoI request to Norfolk Police showing that over the past 12 months, they have spent precisely £5,649.09 [US$8843.64] on the investigation.
 
All of that was disbursed back in February; and all but £80.05 went on “invoices for work in the last six months”.
 
Of all the figures surrounding the current story, that is perhaps the one that most merits further interrogation.
 
Thu, 2011-06-16 15:14Richard Littlemore
Richard Littlemore's picture

Skeptical Science launches interactive history

The great Australian blog SkepticalScience has launched an Interactive History of Climate Science that provides an instant - and visual - reference for the overwhelming scientific weight behind our understanding of global warming and climate change.

The SkepticalScience “History” is hinged on an interactive graphic that allows you to choose any year since 1824 and establish how many climate science papers were written that year, what was the accumulated total from all previous years and how many of all the papers were “skeptical,” “neutral” or supportive of the theory that human activity is causing the world to warm in a dangerous and unprecedented way.

The graphic also allows you to click on the “bubble” from any particular year and see the actual papers.

Mon, 2011-02-07 08:24Richard Littlemore
Richard Littlemore's picture

"ArticGate" - Heartland Backs Schmitt in Climate Misinformation

Incompetent or Dishonest - Either Way They’re Wrong

The former astronaut and proud climate change denier Harrison Schmitt is not alone in making the false claim that “Artic [sic] sea ice has returned to 1989 levels of coverage.” He has been bolstered  by the smokey hacks at the Heartland Institute, and especially by the brittle letter writer and Heartland head honcho, Joseph Bast.

If Schmitt’s false statement had stood on its own (or if he had moved to correct it when it was pointed out), you could reasonably have dismissed it as an error made in good faith.  But when Bast stooped to the flagrant manipulation necessary to argue that Schmitt’s assertion could have some basis in fact, well, you have to wonder - especially when there is already an established relationship between Schmitt and Heartland (check the name on the podium in the Schmitt denier video).

It’s awkward always to trace climate denial back to the money trail. Some people - maybe even Schmitt - deny climate science out of ideological blindness, not greedy self-interest. But it’s interesting that Heartland’s two favourite projects are denying the science of climate change and arguing that tobacco is really not all that bad for you. It’s relevant, too, that before they started hiding their funding sources, Heartland used to acknowledge the generous support of the tobacco and oil industries in propping up the “think” tank’s operations.

Douglas V. Hoyt

Douglas V. Hoyt

 Credentials

  • M.S., Astro-Geophysics, University of Colorado.
  • B.S.. Physics, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.

Source: [1]

 Background

Douglas V. Hoyt is a retired solar physicist with Raytheon Corporation.

Read more: Douglas V. Hoyt
Subscribe to Skeptical Science